
Class 
Book. 
GopiglitJi! 



CQEZRIGHT DEPOSffi 



RELIGIOUS 



IONS 



IN THEIR 



EXTERNAL RELATIONS 



DISSERTATION 

BMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THEOLOGY OF 

THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA 



FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS 
FOR THE DEGREE I 



DOCTOR OF CANON LAW 



By Celestine A. Freriks, C.PP.S., J.C.L. 
Catholic University of America 
t#,1916 



" 



RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 



IN THEIR 



EXTERNAL RELATIONS 



1 5 



»-*— * — -^^«a^cx— < ..■■ -4_i y% ^ _ . A ^ m. . P- /"W 



^u. 



RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 



IN THEIR 



EXTERNAL RELATIONS 



DISSERTATION 



SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THEOLOGY OF 
THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA 



IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS 

FOR THE DEGREE 



DOCTOR OF CANON LAW 




A 



By Celestine Ar Freriks, C.PP.S., J.C.L. 

Catholic University of America 

1916 



NIHIL OBSTAT 



WASHINGTON, D. C, DIE 14 JUNII 1916 



>£ THOMAS J. SHAHAN, S. T. D., 

CENSOR DEPUTATUS 



^% 



Copyright, 1916 

BY 

C. A. Freriks 
All Rights Reserved 



Washington 

Columbia Polytechnic Institute 

for the Blind 

1916 

JUN -5 1916 
CU431403 



rr? 















<r> 






CONTENTS. 



PAGE 

Introduction 6 

Definition and Explanation of Terms 9 

An Historical Survey of Ecclesiastical Approval 16 

The Founding and Approval of Religious Congregations ... 33 

Entrance into a Religious Congregation 43 

The Bond of Religious Life 56 

Egress from a Religious Institute 64 

The Relation of Congregations to the Holy See 76 

The Relation of Congregations to the Ordinary 85 

Sources and Bibliography Ill 



6 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

INTRODUCTION. 

A treatise on Religious Congregations can hardly be prefaced 
more fitly than in the words of Pius X : "Dei providentis benigni- 
tatem, opportune Ecclesiae temporibus subvenientem, cum alia 
multa ostendunt, turn hoc praeclare, quod veteribus religiosorum 
Ordinibus ob conversionem publicarum rerum dispersis afflictisque, 
nova instituta accessere, quae professionem religiosae vitae re- 
tinendo, ingravescentibus Christiani populi necessitatibus multi- 
pliciter deserviunt. . . . Profecto sodalitatum istiusmodi 
tarn bene de Ecclesia deque ipsa civili societate merentium, sper- 
andum est, nunquam defuturam copiam : hodieque libet agnoscere, 
usque adeo eas increbuisse, ut nullum videatur esse ministrandae 
caritatis Christianae genus, quod illae reliquum fecerint." 1 

The truth of these words of the Sovereign Pontiff are in our 
times so evident to both Catholics and non-Catholics that they 
naturally, as it were, turn to the heroic souls of Religion in al- 
most every need and affliction of soul and body. Wherever the 
standard of the Cross has been carried, there divine Providence 
has chosen heroic souls to imitate the sacrifices and charity of 
the Crucified. For centuries these elect of God were banded 
together in Institutes called Orders which demanded of their 
members the profession of Solemn vows and generally also the 
observance of the Cloister. With the changed conditions of 
society it frequently became very difficult, and in some countries 
even impossible, to adhere to this ancient and approved mode of 
Religious life and still render to society that multifarious service 
which Christian charity inspires. Hence divine Providence, as 
the Holy Father tells us, came to the rescue by providing Insti- 
tutes which were adapted to our times and necessities. 

For a long time, however, the Church was extremely reluctant 
to recognize officially some of the new Institutes that had sprung 
up in the various parts of the Christian world. She ever appre- 



1 Deer. "Dei providentis," July 16, 1906. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS « 

ciated the good they performed and repeatedly confirmed their 
rule of life as well adapted to the purpose of their Institutes. 
But it was only after years of probation that She gradually placed 
Her official approval on single Communities and their mode of 
living. Especially was this Her attitude towards Institutes of 
women. 

But it remained for the celebrated Pontiff, Leo XIII. by Ins 
decree "Conditae a Christo,'' to give the Congregations a perma- 
nent and specific standing in the Common law of the Church. 
Many regulations have been added to this "Magna Charta" of 
Religious Congregations. Pius X says in one of his decrees : 
"Apostolica Sedes, admodum sollicita provehendae perfectionis 
inter Religiosas utriusque sexus Familias, plures edidit easque 
saluberrimas leges, quibus quaedam vetantur, quaedam praescrib- 
untur, ad Sodalium ingressum, institutionem, vota, studia. vitae 
externae rationem aliaque id genus apte moderanda." - 

These words suggest immediately that Pius X's motto. "Re- 
staurare omnia in Christo," embraced nearly every phase of 
Religious life. A consistent policy of reforming and generalizing 
the laws for Religious Congregations was carried on throughout 
his entire pontificate. These regulations and generalizations, 
however, extended chiefly to the external relations of Congre- 
gations. Some important modifications and new laws were made 
for the internal regime, but even these have frequently a more or 
less close connection with external conditions. 

Many valuable works have been written in the Latin, German, 
French, and Italian languages on Religious Congregations. Fre- 
quently their authors wrote before a definite and common status 
had been assigned to Religious Institutes. Then, too, large 
parts of their works are often devoted to the "Normae" drafted 
and used by the Holy See in approving new Institutes. But the 
Holy See has never imposed these "Normae" on all Congrega- 
tions as laws. Still it must be said that no better foundation 



2 Deer. S. C. de Religiosis, July 3, 1910. 



8 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

could l»e laid for their writings, for they express the mind of 
the Holy See. Finally, the new discipline demands a reconstruc- 
tion of many of the works on Religious Congregations. 

These different circumstances and the fact that Religious So- 
cieties occupy such an important place in Religious life and 
ecclesiastical legislation, have led us to believe that Religious 
Congregations afforded a valuable subject for a canonical study. 
The present study, however, excludes particular and internal 
regulations and privileges. It aims solely at investigating the 
legislation of the Church in regard to the external relations of 
Religious Congregations in general. For this purpose it has 
seemed necessary to review the origin and development of Re- 
ligious Congregations, to give the laws governing a new founda- 
tion and its approval, the conditions requisite for entrance, the 
regulations regarding dismissal, and the external government. 

With this brief foreword we introduce the reader to the follow- 
ing eight chapters on "Religious Congregations in Their External 
Relations." hoping some day to perfect and supply what is wanting 
in them. We deplore the fact that European conditions pre- 
vented us from investigating some valuable works having direct 
bearing on our subject. Some Canonists have written com- 
mentaries on many of the new decrees used in this treatise, but 
at present it is very difficult and in some cases impossible, as we 
experienced, to obtain them. No doubt these experienced minds 
throw considerable light on many points of the new regulations. 
To all, however, that will be said in the following pages, let the 
phrase "salvo meliore judicio" be added and understood. 



IX THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS R 



CHAPTER I. 



Definition and Explanation of Terms. 



The word "Congregation" is of Latin origin [congregare, f. 
con — together, and gregare — to collect into a flock or company, 
f. gregem (grex), flock, herd] and signifies both the action of 
collecting and its result, viz., a gathering or assemblage of men, 
animals or things. In its concrete sense as an assemblage of 
persons it is not found in classical Latin ; it is, however, found 
in the Vulgate. 1 Both Old and New Testaments predicate it of 
Israelites and Christians in their collective capacity as well as of 
particular groups and classes. - 

The Biblical use of the term found application in secular and 
ecclesiastical institutions and corporations. Assemblies, societies, 
and faculties of learning, were frequently designated "Congrega- 
tions" in civic and social life. 3 In transacting ecclesiastical af- 
fairs the Church, both in Council and Curia, has from time im- 
memorial cailed the commissions discharging the legislative, ad- 
ministrative and judicial functions " Congregations," or the 
"Roman Congregations" in the case of the permanent commis- 
sions or tribunals. 4 

With tiie development of Religious life in the early Church, 
groups of chosen souls established their abodes in the wilder- 
ness and deserts to devote their lives to a more intimate union 
with God. These little communities of "saints" are known in 



1 The National English Dictionary. 

2 Num. I, 2; XVI. 16: I Macab.. VII. 12; II Thess.. II. 1. 
s A New English Dictionary. Vol. 8, p. 824. 

4 Hilling, "Procedure of the Roman Curia"; Pastor. "History of the 
Popes." 



10 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

history as the rirst "Congregations" of Religious."' Later, the 
Monastic system found greater protection for itself by uniting 
the independent Monasteries into "Congregations" under a more 
or less general direction and government. But the severe life 
of the ancient Orders was not adapted to the new conditions of 
society in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Although these 
Institutes have always been the glory of the Church, yet their 
rules prevented them from participating in many works of re- 
ligion and charity which the changed conditions of society de- 
manded. Hence arose organizations, clerical and laical, which 
devoted their united efforts to the welfare of the Church and 
its members, under a rule of life suitable to their aim but greatly 
unlike the established Institutes. These organizations the 
Church incorporated. While they could not be classed among 
the Religious of Solemn vows and of Cloistered life, they re- 
ceived the canonical title of "Congregations" pure and simple, 
in contradistinction to the ancient Orders. So, the ecclesiastical 
approval of one of the first of these Institutes specifices it, "con- 
gregatio de corpore cleri saeculari." 7 

A Religious Congregation, therefore, may be defined : A society, 
instituted and approved by ecclesiastical authority, in which the 
members profess to tend towards perfection by the practice of 
the three Simple and perpetual vows of poverty, chastity and 
obedience. 8 In such associations the true nature of the Religious 
state is preserved. They are, therefore, called in the language 



5 Clem, of Alex., Paedagog., 17, in P. G. VIII, 320; Butler, "Lives of 
Saints" ; Cassian, Coll. 2a Praef atio ; St. Benedict's Rule, c. 77, 2 ; Gasquet, 
Monastic! sm. 

6 Heimbucher, Orden und Kongr. vol. I ; Vermeersch, De Rel. Inst, et 
Personis, vol. I; Le Canoniste Contemp., vol. 25; Casquet, o. c. ; Inno- 
cent III, Const. "In singularis" ; C. of Trent, Sess. 25, c. 6 and 8. 

7 Const. "Ex commissa," Sept. 22, 1655. 

8 Ojetti, Synopsis Rerum Mor. et Juris Pont., N. 1512; Bastien, Direc- 
toire Canonique, n. 1. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 1 1 

of the Church and of Canonists, "Religious Congregations" in 
the strictest sense, and are "distinguished from the Religious 
Orders chiefly by the absence of the Solemn vows, by their less 
rigid mode of personal allegiance (vota simplicia), by their 
simpler organization and constitution, and by their freer inter- 
course with the world." 9 

There are, nevertheless, many Religious Institutes in which 
the vows are not perpetual but temporary ; others in which only 
one vow, or more, is made, be it temporary or perpetual. These 
Institutes naturally lack the essentials of the Religious state, 
in the strict and traditional sense, and are only improperly called 
"Religious Congregations." 10 

When, furthermore, Religious Institutes are composed prin- 
cipally of clerics, law and commentators on law generally style 
them "Ecclesiastical Congregations." u Although they are placed 
in the category of Religious Congregations, yet, in virtue of 
Sacred Orders which their members receive, the Holy See fre- 
quently makes many exceptions and special legislation in their 
favor. 12 The status of all these Religious Congregations has 
been defined by Leo XIII, in his Decree "Conditae a Christo" 
(Dec. 8, 1900), and their place in Common law definitely deter- 
mined. Notwithstanding the common element in all these Insti- 
tutes, multiple diverging relations augment the difficulty in 
ascertaining the due application of ecclesiastical laws to these 
Religious Congregations. Hence petitions ever recur to the 
Holy See. 

Still greater difficulties arise in regard to those numerous Con- 
gregations in which are professed no vows, but a mere oath of 
perseverance or a promise pure and simple. These organizations 
may consist of clerics or of laics. Upon ecclesiastical authorization 



t Hilling, Procedure of the Roman Curia, p. 219. 

J *Ojetti, 1. c. ; Bastien, 1. c. ; Vermeersch, De Rel. Inst, et Pers., p. 42. 
11 Vermeersch, o. c. ; Sebastianelli, Praelectiones Jur. Can., vol. II, p. 353. 
"Const. "Conditae a Christo" (Dec. 8, 1900) C. II, n. 9, 10, 11. 



12 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

they become true Religious Associations and are, therefore, 
classed among the Congregations, but only in a very broad and 
improper sense. 13 

To these must be added another species of associations insti- 
tuted by the Church for carrying on works of piety or of charity 
in the world without leading a common life under the direction 
of an authorized Superior. These, in official documents, are 
sometimes called Congregations but more frequently Confra- 
ternities. 11 This class of Congregations so-called is outside of our 
scope. 

The basis of this treatise shall be the Religious Congregations 
of Simple vows, because they possess the common element which 
permits of generalization, viz., the Simple vows. Those com- 
munities, however, which have not the vows as a bond of per- 
severance, but receive ecclesiastical approval, strive for perfec- 
tion under a common rule and live after the manner of true 
Religious, cannot be excluded from our investigation. In virtue 

of these common principles, ecclesiastical law, in most regula- 
tions, considers them on an equal basis. Where limitations or 
extensions are necessary, explicit reference is made to the excep- 
tion. This procedure, we think, has become Rome's mode of 
action more and more in these latter years as will be evidenced 
throughout the dissertation. 

May we then class the members of all the foregoing Congre- 
gations as Religious ? Benedict XIV in his Constitution, "Ouam- 
vis justo" (1749), drew attention to the fact that the Sisters of 
the Anglican Congregation could not be called Religious because 
they made no profession of Solemn vows and retained no Cloister. 
By this act he simply declared the traditional practice of the 
Roman Curia and of Canonists. Gregory XIII made an exception 



3 ; Vermeersch, 1. c. ; Ojetti, 1. c. 
14 Ojetti, 1. c, n. 1495; Vermeersch, 1. c. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 13 

in favor of the Scholastics of the Jesuit Society. 15 But later 
legislation has at times ignored the distinction and designated as 
Religious all those who strive for perfection under a common 
rule of life, authorized and directed by the Church. 16 Expressions 
similar to the following are frequently found: "Religiosi votis 
temporaneis vel iuramento perseverantiae vel supra dictis promis- 
sionibus ligati, etc." 17 Here is but another instance in which 
technicalities yielded to custom, for common parlance never 
adopted any other appellation. 

In regard to women Religious, in particular, the names "Nun" 
and "Sister" are frequently used promiscuously. Etymologically 
and canonically the word "monialis" (Nun), in the strict sense, 
is predicable only of persons in Solemn vows and the "Normae" 
of 1901 forbade its use except for such ; but this, too, is applied 
to women in Institutes of Simple vows in which the papal Cloister 
is observed, and sometimes even to others. 18 However, late de- 
crees draw a distinction between Nuns and Sisters in favor of the 
original classification, i. e., Nuns are such as have the Solemn 
vows, or at least Simple vows which prepare them for the Solemn 
vows. All others are classed as Sisters. 19 

No strict distinction, on the contrary, is made of the term 
"Profession" of Religious life. Authors forbid the use of the 
term "Religious Profession" save in the case of Religious Orders 



"Const. "Ascendente Domino," 1584. 

1G Decr. "Dei providentis" ; July 16, 1906; Const. "Sapienti consilio," 
June 28, 1908; Deer. S. C. de Rel., Apr. 5, 1910; aliud eiusdem, Nov. 21, 
1908; Vermeersch, Periodisa, Vol. II, p. 101; Ojetti, De Rom. Curia; Deer. 
S. C. de Rel., Feb. 3, 1913. 

17 In the Response of S. C. de Rel., of Apr. 5, 1910. 

1S Vermeersch, De Rel., Inst., et Pers., p. 43 ; Periodica, Vol. VI, p. 60. 

19 Deer. "Cum singulae," May 16, 1911 ; Deer. "Cum de sacramentalibus," 
Feb. 3, 1913; Vermeersch, De Rel. Inst, et Pers., p. 443; Periodica, Vol. 
VI, p. 50. 



14 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

to which it can be properly applied, 20 but Pius X does not hesitate 
to speak of Religious associations, "quae professionem Religiosae 
vitae retinendo, ingravescentibus Christiani populi necessitatibus 
multipliciter deserviunt." 21 And rightly so, for also in Congre- 
gations a public and solemn declaration confirmed by vow, oath, 
or promise is made by persons to devote themselves to God and 
His exclusive service according to the direction of the rules of 
the Institute. 

Rules, finally, are norms, standards or guides of life. Canon 
law has standardized four rules, or better, four sets of rules, viz., 
that of St. Basil, that of St. Augustine, that of St. Benedict and 
that of St. Francis of Assissi. Along with these existed the 
rules of St. Pachomius, of St. Columbanus, of St. Anthony and 
of Cassian. 22 The first four norms became the general "Regu- 
lae" for Religious. Others were strictly forbidden as will be 
seen later. But Leo X broke away from the canonical prohibi- 
tion by giving the Franciscan Tertiary Congregation a new rule 
of life. This, in 1877, was assigned by Pius IX to a new Re- 
ligious Congregation in India. The "Canonical Regulae," there- 
fore, possess great antiquity, and enjoy special ecclesiastical ap- 
proval and the most extensive use. 23 

However, at various times and for different reasons other 
regulations, which emanated from the general Chapters and Su- 
periors of particular Orders, were called "Constitutions," because 
they did not enjoy papal approval and were, moreover, intended 
only for special ends and purposes of particular Orders. This 
distinction between Rules and Constitutions is observed by authors 
when speaking of Orders or of Institutes possessing one of the 
ancient Regulae. But in other Religious Institutes the distinc- 
tion is arbitrary. In fact, the S. C. EE. et RR. has repeatedly 



20 Bastien, 1. c, p. 3 ; Battandier, "Guide Canonique," p. 109. 

21 Deer. "Dei providentis," July 16, 1906. 
~~ Gasquet, o. c. ; Butler, o. c. 

23 Bouix, De Jure Reg., Vol. II, p. 544 ; Sebastianelli, De Personis, p. 351. 



IX THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 15 

declared that it is unwarranted ; 24 and, moreover, has repeatedly 
permitted and approved the statutes of Congregations when 
termed "Regulae." J5 The terms, "Rules," "Statutes," and "Con- 
stitutions," consequently, when applied to Religious Congrega- 
tions are used synonomously, but the "Normae" of 1901 also 
demanded that the term "Constitutiones," and not "Regulae," be 
used in Congregations. If any distinction, then, is made be- 
tween them, the reasons must be sought in the particular Insti- 
tute rather than in Common law. 



24 Bizzarri, "Collectanea," 782 ; VIII, 2, 789 ; XIV, 10—791 ; XV, 6. 

~ : ' Bastien, o. c, p. 3. 



16 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 



CHAPTER II. 
An Historical Survey of Ecclesiastical Approval. 1 

The history of the Regular Orders has been written by different 
authors. Not the same can be said of Religious Congregations. 
And, indeed, it is not an inviting task to undertake, for many 
of the Institutes have disappeared entirely, leaving little more 
than a mere name to history. Others, while they have weathered 
the storm of ecclesiastical opposition, often lack the necessary 
and precise data from which their early struggles may be gleaned. 
Then the large number of these Institutes and the almost insuper- 
able difficulties involved in obtaining the available facts, have 
kept many scholars from applying their talents and time to this 
work. It is not the purpose of this treatise to supply the defi- 
ciency. But the scope of our subject at least calls for a brief 
sketch of the origin, growth and approval of Religious Congre- 
gations in the light of ecclesiastical legislation. 

Some strong arguments have been produced by several Canon- 
ists and Moralists to prove that the vow r s of the early Religious 
were all Simple. 2 One could therefore, with some show of au- 
thority class them among Religious Congregations in our sense. 
But it is a useless undertaking. One thing, though, seems certain, 
viz., that at the end of the twelfth century the Church acknowl- 
edged only the strict Religious Orders with Solemn vows. The 
basis for this is found in the Decretals which invariably speak 
of "Religiones" and "Religiosi Ordines." 3 Authors admit that 



1 Vermeersch, De Rel. Inst, et Pers., vols. I et II ; Periodica, vols. 1 — 7 ; 
cfr. Heimbucner, ''Die Orden und Kongr," vols. I et II; H. Hohn, "Voca- 
tions," 2 vols. ; Elinor Dehey, "Religious Orders of Women in the United 

States." 

2 Cfr. Ballay's article in Arck., f. k. k., torn. 17. 
3 C. 9, tit. 36, X. lib. Ill; c. 3, tit. 17, in 6°. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 1 



pi 



no explicit and absolute proof to the effect that these terms were 
used in the twelfth century exclusively in connection with Orders 
of Solemn vows is obtainable. 4 But the very fact that the Orders 
of that time have continued throughout the centuries, substan- 
tially unaltered, creates a very great presumption that at that 
time they were as we find them today, and, therefore, the above 
mentioned terms invariably signified only Orders with Solemn 
vows. Gratian draws a strict distinction between the Simple 
vows and the vow professed in Religion : "Hie distinguendum est 
quod voventium alii sunt simpliciter voventes . . . alii sunt, 
quibus post votum, benedictio accedit consecrationi, vel propo- 
situm religionis." 5 Bernardus of Pavia adds his authority to 
the same distinction. 6 Boniface VIII, however, definitely lays 
down the principle that vows taken in approved Societies are 
Solemn : "Illud solum votum defcere dici solemne . . . quod 
solemnizatum fuerit per suceptionem S. Ordinis aut per pro- 
fessionem expressam vel tacitam factam alicui de religionibus 
per Sedem Apostolicam approbatis." ° From these statements 
the conclusion is warranted that no Religious Congregations as 
such, i. e., with only Simple vows, were acknowledged by the 
Holy See at the time of Boniface VIII in the thirteenth century. 
The argument increases in weight when viewed in connection 
with the prohibition of joining any unapproved Order. Innocent 
III forbade not only the formation of new Orders, but also strictly 
prohibited persons from affiliating themselves to any unapproved 
Order : "Ne nimis religionum diversitas gravem in Ecclesiam Dei 
confusionem inducat, firmiter, prohibemus, ne quis de caetero 
novam Religionem inveniat sed quicumque ad Religionem con- 
verti voluerit, unam de approbatis assumat." 7 Notwithstanding 



4 Sebastianelli, Praelectiones, de Pers., p. 357. 

3 Decretum Gratiani, c. Presbyt. 8, D. 27. 

6 Apud Vermeersch, De Rel. Inst, et Pers., Pars. I. 

6 C. unic. de voto, tit. 15, lib. Ill in 6°. 

7 C. 9, tit. 36, X. lib. III. 



18 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

the peremptory decree of the Sovereign Pontiff and the IV Lateran 
Council, new Institutes did spring up and the Council of Lyons 
(1274) under Gregory X not only reiterated the law of Innocent 
III, but also decreed the disbandment of all Institutes founded 
since the Decree: "Ne aliquis de caetero novum Ordinem aut 
Religionem adveniat, vel habitum novae Religionis assumat. 
Cunctae affatim Religiones et Ordines mendicantes post dictum 
Concilium adinventos, qui nulla conrirmatione sedis apostolicae 
meruerunt, perpetuae prohibitioni subjicimus et quatenus pro- 
cesserant revocamus." 8 

Among the condemned Societies are enumerated especially the 
Humiliati, The Poor of Lyons and the Beghards. But appar- 
ently some others persevered in spite of the regulations. Hence 
Clement V issued another proclamation condemning them. 9 The 
reason for this apparent severity of the Popes was not so much 
the great multiplication of new Religious Orders or Institutes 
(for good reasons justified new foundations) as the heretical doc- 
trines and immoral practices prevalent in certain Institutes. This 
fact was known to Bishops and people alike. Hence John XXII 
was called upon to interpret the mind of the Holy See in the 
above mentioned condemnations, especially since many Institutes 
had arisen which deserved well of the Church. His declara- 
tion proclaims the "tolerari potest" of certain Institutes under 
the surveyance and jurisdiction of local Bishops: "Ceterum 
stattim Beghinarum huiusmodi quos esse permittimus (nisi de 
his per sedem apostolicam aliter ordinandis existent) nullatenus 
ex praemissis intendimus approbare." 10 The Institute as such 
is not to be approved, the Pope continues, but under the condi- 
tions their mode of life may be permitted by the Bishops. 

Congregations of this sort were, seemingly, the Dames of St. 
Andrew, the Beghines, Magdalenes, and Soeurs de la Misercorde 



8 C. 3, tit. 17, in 6°. 

8 C. I, tit. 11, lib. Ill, In Clem. 

! " C. Unica, tit. 7, ex Extrav. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 19 

de Jesu. This latter Society struggled on against all opposition 
from the thirteenth century until the year 1627 when the Holy 
See finally granted it pontifical recognition. 11 Moreover many 
Associations of Tertiaries had arisen which were affiliated to one 
or another of the strict Orders and at times sought Papal ap- 
proval. But it was reserved to Leo X to establish them on a 
solid basis of community life. 12 He acknowledged not only their 
good work, but wrote also a special rule for them which has be- 
come the norm for many Religious Institutes of women. As 
we saw in the last chapter, Pius IX assigned this same rule to 
a new Community of Sisters in India no later than 1877. 

Prior to the sixteenth century, however, comparatively few 
instances are found where Community life was professed with- 
out the Solemn vows. But between the twelfth and sixteenth 
centuries many new Orders were authorized by the Holy See. 
Authors generally classify them as Friars, Canons Regular, 
Clerks Regular, and the so-called Second Orders of St. Francis, 
of St. Dominic, of the Carmelites, and of the Augustinians. 
These, however, espoused the mode of life sanctioned by the 
Church for many centuries in the form of strict Orders with 
Solemn vows. 13 

But the revolutionary spirit of the fifteenth and sixteenth cen- 
turies had a baneful influence upon all Religious life. Discipline 
had become lax in many Institutes and scandals not a few aroused 
the indignation of those in high places. The Tridentine reforms 
sought a renovation of Religious life and a return to ancient 
principles and traditions. Wherefore the Council of Trent de- 
creed in session XXV, c. 1 : "Hoc decreto praecipit ut omnes 
regulares, tarn viri quam mulieres, ad regulae, quam professi 
sunt, praescriptam vitam instituant et componant, atque in primis 
quae ad suae professions perfectionem, ut oboedientiae, pauper- 



ii 



H. Hohn, "Vocations." 

Const. "Inter Cetera," 1521. 

Heimbucher, o. c. ; Boudinhon, Le Canoniste, vol. 25 sq. 



20 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

tatis et castitatis ac si quae alia sunt alicuius regulae et ordinis 
peculiaria vota et praecepta, ad eorum respective essentiam nee 
non ad communem vitam, victum et vestitum conservanda perti- 
nentia fideliter observent." It is superflous to adduce the his- 
torical foundation for these specifications. Let it suffice that the 
Bishops were commissioned as the special delegates of the Holy 
See to see that the reforms were inaugurated and maintained, 
not only in Institutes which made no Solemn profession, but also 
in Monasteries and Orders: "Commendata monasteria etiam 
abbatiae, prioratus et praepositurae nuncupatae, in quibus non 
viget regularis observantia . . . ab episcopis, etiam, tam- 
quam apostolicae sedis delegatis annis singulis visitentur; curent- 
que iidem episcopi congruentibus remediis . . . ut quae 
renovatione indigent aut restauratione, reficiantur." u 

The Council of Trent heralds in a new era for Religious Orders 
and Institutes. Since its immediate effects were different on In- 
stitutes of men and of women, a clearer view will be obtained by 
taking each separately. 

Institutes of Men. 

Pius V responded to the Council of Trent by issuing regulations 
which would eradicate the abuses and innovations of Religious 
Institutes. But his means were radical and drastic. They per- 
mitted no temporizing. By the Bull "Lubricum vitae genus" 
(1568), Religious and Tertiaries were compelled to change their 
mode of life and the nature of their Institute. The determinate 
stand of the Holy See remained inflexible. The gist of the Bull 
is given in the following words : "Statuimus ut omnes et singuli 
. . . in communi et sub oboedientia voluntari et extra votum 
solemne Religionis viventes . . . professionem regularem 
solemnem emittere . . . et intra viginti quattuor horarum 
spatium palam et sponte deliberent et declarent." This mandate 
extended not only to the profession of Solemn vows, but also to 

14 Sess. 21, c. 8. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 21 

the choice of one of the four approved "Regulae" as decreed by 
Innocent III and Gregory X. 

It is difficult in our day to measure the influence this legislation 
had upon the Religious life of the Institutes of Men, but tangible 
results were apparent at once. Not only were reforms effected 
but Institutes, organized contrary to the mind of the Church, 
were affiliated to the Orders of the Regular observance. Thus 
Pius V united a Franciscan Tertiary Community to the Regular 
Order. 15 In the wake of the Religious revival new Institutes 
arose and old ones sought pontifical approval. The Clerks Regu- 
lar of the Mother of God were approved in 1574, an independent 
Discalced Carmelite Order in 1580, the Camillians in 1582, the 
Clerks Minor in 1588, the Clerks Regular of Pious Schools in 
1621, the Marian Clerks Regulars in 1673, the Order of Penance 
in 1784, and the latest Order seems to be that of the Canons 
Regular of the Immaculate Conception in 1866. 16 The most 
checkered career of all these new Orders seems to have been 
that of the Clerks Regular of Pious Schools. Founded in 1597 
at Rome, they united with the Clerks Regular of the Mother 
of God in 1614. This union was severed in 1617 and the Holy 
See gave them a separate approval in 1621. Dissensions within 
their own ranks induced Rome to dissolve them in 1646. Ten 
years later, however, a new and more flourishing Institute arose 
upon the ruins of the old. At present they number no less than 
two thousand members. 

During these three centuries of Religious advancement, the 
Oriental Church has not manifested the same growth of the 
Religious life as the Western Church. It has added but little 
worthy of mentioning. In the year 1701 we find the Order of 
Mechitarians, or the Armenian Benedictines (founded at Con- 
stantinople) which is perhaps the only new Order since the Coun- 



15 Cfr. Heimbucher, o. c; Theol. Pract. Quartalschrift, vol. 65, p. 365; 
Zak, "Oesterreichisches Klosterbuch" ; Holn, "Vocations." 

18 Ibidem. 



22 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

cil of Trent. It received ecclesiastical recognition soon after- 
wards, but its Constitutions were approved as late as 1909. The 
ancient Order of Antonians, too, received new life and strength 
by having its Constitutions revised and approved by the Holy 
See in 1740. 17 

Did, then, the Religious Congregations of men disappear with 
the advent of reform? No. The conditions of the times, and 
the needs of the Church together with the aspirations of apostolic 
men to meet both, produced, with God's grace, organizations of 
men which the Holy See gladly received and guided. They were 
accepted, not indeed on an equal basis with the ancient Orders, 
but as divinely inspired Institutes destined to meet exigencies that 
the austere rules of the existing Orders could not well provide for. 
Their humble beginnings were naturally diocesan and therefore 
furthered by Bishops only. When their field of labor extended 
beyond the diocesan borders, a conflict, or at least an occasion for 
conflict, of Episcopal authority too often arose. This naturally 
led them to seek Roman approval and Roman jurisdiction. If 
the Institute's field of labor promised permanence, the Holy See 
hesitated not to receive it under her protecting mantle and, if 
necessary, modify or grant it an organization, rule and privileges 
suitable to its scope and purpose. 

Thus hardly had the echoes of the Council of Trent and the 
Bull "Lubricum vitae genus" subsided, when the Congregations 
of the Oratorians (1587) and the Doctrinarians (1593) budded 
forth into a vigorous life under Episcopal authorization and which 
readily succeeded in winning recognition and approval from the 
Pontiffs of their times. The seventeenth century added the Con- 
gregations of the Pious Works (1601), the Lazarists (1625), the 
Eudists (1643), the Sulpicians (1658), and the Congregation of 
Missions (1658). With the advent of the eighteenth century the 
Religious attitude of the age and the Holy See favored a stricter 
discipline. Perhaps the Congregation of the Fathers of the 



Ibidem ; et Deer. S. C. de Prop. Fide, Aug. 6, 1909. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 23 

Holy Ghost (1703) must be excepted, but the other Religious 
Congregations of this century approached more and more the 
strict Orders. Such were especially the Passionists (1725) and 
the Redemptorists (1732). In consequence of their strict dis- 
cipline and of their perpetual Simple vows, they obtained nearly 
the same rights and privileges as these Orders. Heretofore the 
Holy See had left intact the Episcopal jurisdiction in Congrega- 
tions, but upon these strict Institutes She conferred full ex- 
emption, and in subsequent legislation ordinarily considered them 
as belonging in the same category with the strict Order. 

In nearly all these Congregations the Simple vows were made. 
They were generally considered essential to community life. The 
nineteenth century, however, felt no repugnance in deviating even 
from this mode of Religious life. No doubt the turbulent status 
of civil society was the chief factor responsible. But be the cause 
what it may, no less than forty Religious Societies and Congre- 
gations sprang into existence, some at the instigation of Bishops, 
others upon the wish and suggestions of the Roman Pontiffs. 
Still others owe their origin to heroic souls who saw in them the 
best means of meeting the needs of the times. 

Their bond of perseverance and obligations of leading a Re- 
ligious life according to the counsels of the Master, consisted now 
in Simple vows, now in an oath, and quite often in a mere promise 
of fidelity. 

The Holy See no longer manifested any hesitancy in sanction- 
ing these Institutes when they had proved themselves profitable 
in the eyes of the Bishops and their work could be furthered by 
Her approval. Repeatedly the highest praises, special privileges, 
and extensive powers, where sufficient reasons warranted them, 
were bestowed without reluctance. 18 

These privileges, rights and limited exemptions followed not 
from Common law, but were granted in the particular Indults of 



U 



Meimbucher, o. c. ; Boudinhon, "Le Canoniste," vol. 25 sq. ; Bizzarri, 
"Collectonea" ; Hilling, "Proceedings of the Roman Curia" ; The respective 
"Decrees" of praise and approval. 



24 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

approval. They varied according to the nature and scope of 
the individual Institute. But this very frequently caused consid- 
erable inconvenience, and at times occasioned no little confusion 
for both Bishops and Superiors. Hence Leo XIII sought to 
remedy the difficulties by laying down general principles and laws 
which must govern all Religious Congregations, Diocesan and 
Pontifical respectively. This legislation is incorporated in the 
Constitution "Conditae a Christo," dated and promulgated De- 
cember 8th, 1900. To this "Corpus Juris" for Religious, numer- 
ous regulations have been added in subsequent years, so that the 
Congregations today find themselves on a full canonical basis 
nearly as well defined as that of the Regular Orders. 

Under the benign guidance and favorable legislation of the 
Holy See, these Congregations of men have grown and developed 
to such an extent that they compare well, at least in numbers, 
with the strict Orders. To take cognizance of the Diocesan 
Institutes in such a comparison is hardly possible. But, accord- 
ing to statistics for 1913, there exist today some thirty-three Regu- 
lar Orders of Knights, Monks, Mendicants, Canons Regular and 
Clerks Regular with a total membership of about fifty-eight thou- 
sand Religious. On the other hand, the Holy See has approved 
in these latter centuries some sixty-six Congregations with an 
aggregate membership of about fifty-nine thousand Religious. 19 
This vast array of Clerics and Brothers lend their service to 
nearly every work of Charity and Religion within the Catholic 
Church which has for its domain the kingdom of the earth and 
for its inheritance the peoples of every tribe and nation and 
tongue. 

Institutes of Women. 

The lax Religious spirit of the fifteenth and sixteenth cen- 
turies had also invaded the Cloisters of women. The Council of 
Trent (Sess. 25, c. 5) renewed the strict legislation of Boniface 



"Annuario Pontificio," 1915; Theol. Pracktische Quartalschrift, 1. c; 

H. Hohn, "Vocations for Men." 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 25 

VIII 20 and commissioned the Ordinaries to enforce the strict 
observance of the Solemn vows and the papal Cloister. 

But here, too, it was the great Pius V who was to inaugurate 
the actual reform. By his decree "Circa Pastoralis" (May 26, 
1566), he sought to renovate Cloister life and force all Religious, 
even the Tertiaries, into Congregations to take the Solemn vows 
and observe the Cloister. Should any refuse and continue a 
life of scandal, the Bishops were empowered to mete out the 
severest punishment to compel submission. But let the Pontiff's 
own words show us the mind of the Holy See in introducing 
measures that gave new life and vigor to Religious Institutes and 
Orders : "Mulieres quoque quae Tertiariae seu de Paenitentia 
dicuntur, cuiuscumque fuerit Ordinis in congregatione viventes, 
si et ipsae professae fuerint, ita ut solemne votum emiserint, ad 
clausuram praecise, ut praemittitur, et ipsae teneantur ; quod si 
votum solemne non emiserint, Ordinarii una cum superioribus 
earum hortentur et persuadere studeant, ut illud emittant et 
profiteantur ac post emissionem et professionem eidem clausurae 
se subiciant ; quod si recusaverint et aliquae ex iis inventae fuerint 
scandalose vivere, severissime puniantur. 

"Ceteris autem in omnibus sic absque emissione professionis 
et clausura vivere omnino volentibus interdicimus et perpetuo 
prohibemus, ne in futurum ullam aliam prorsus in suum Ordinem, 
Religionem Congregationemque recipiant. Quod si contra huius- 
modi hanc nostram prohibitionem et decretum aliquas receperint, 
eas ad sic vivendum omnino inhabiles reddimus, ac illarum, 
quaslibet professiones et receptiones irritas facimus et annula- 
mus." 

The fruits of this legislation were soon manifest. Many of 

the Institutes returned to the ancient discipline or at least sub- 
mitted to the letter of the law. The Society of the Jesuitissae was 
abolished by Urban VIII on account of the many intolerable 



29 Const. "Periculoso" ; c. un. de statu regul., tit. 16, lib. Ill in 6°. 



26 REUCIOUS CONGREGATION.S 

abuses that had crept into the Institute. The Carmelite Ter- 
tiaries, at least some of them, affiliated themselves to the strict 
Order of Carmelites. 21 The Ursuline Sisters had organized 
prior to Trent (1537) and had, moreover, also secured pontifical 
recognition as a Congregation. But the stringent demands of 
ecclesiastical authority induced them to adopt the Solemn vows 
and the papal Cloister during the pontificate of Gregory XIII in 
1572. The Soeurs de la Misericorde de Jesu, as mentioned above, 
had struggled against the tide of ecclesiastical opposition and 
prohibition for centuries, but achieved papal approval as a Con- 
gregation in 1627. But in spite of this recognition they, too, 
were destined to yield to the importunities of authority and 
adopt the stricter mode of life. Wherefore they were raised to 
the rank of a regular Order in 1665. — 

New Institutes arose in various parts of the Christian world 
which ever and anon sought the approval of the Holy See. The 
Society of "Notre Dame," the first teaching Community of 
women approved by the Holy See, was founded in 1606. Though 
they received pontifical recognition as a Congregation in the 
following year, they, apparently, like the Soeurs de la Miseri- 
corde de Jesu, were hampered in many ways on account of their 
unfavorable ecclesiastical status. At any rate, in 1608, we find 
them affiliating themselves to the strict Order of Benedictines. 23 

Prominent in the history of the seventeenth century stands the 
Order of the Visitation founded by St. Francis de Sales and 
St. Jane de Chantal. The amiable disposition of St. Francis 
sought to introduce into Religious life a spirit of greater gentility 
and attractiveness. He aimed to "secure the benefits of Religious 
life for persons who had neither the physical strength nor the 
attraction for corporal austerities at the time general in the Re- 
ligious Orders." Consequently it was their wish to found a 



21 H. Hohn, "Vocations." 

22 Ibidem ; Elinor Dehey, "Religious Orders of Women." 

23 Hohn, Ibidem. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 27 

Congregation without the external vows or the obligation of the 
strict Cloister. But in spite of their laudable purpose they were 
compelled to yield to the persuasions of ecclesiastical authority. 
The rule of St. Augustine, together with the Cloister prescribed 
by Trent and Pius V, were imposed upon them in 1615. 

In the following centuries but few new Orders arose. Accord- 
ing to Dr. Hohn, however, the Sisters of St. Joseph (1650), 
the Sisters of the Blessed Sacrament (1639) and the Nuns of 
the Presentation must be mentioned. The Sisters of the Blessed 
Sacrament existed for about thirty years as a Congregation of 
Simple vows, but in 1669 were raised to an Order with Solemn 
vows and papal Cloister. Similar was the development of the 
Nuns of the Presentation. Founded in 1777 as a mere Congre- 
gation, Pius VII elevated them in 1805 to the rank of an Order. 24 
Apparently this closed the period of new Orders of women. 

These new Orders, however, were not the only Institutes of 
that time. The spirit of St. Francis de Sales commenced to 
permeate other saintly men and women. The conviction grew 
that the Master's counsels could be lived in Institutes of less 
severity than the rigid Orders. This would open the door to 
many chosen souls who were, for one reason or another, now 
barred from embracing the Religious life. Bishops in general 
did not check it. True, they realized that such Institutes would 
require careful guidance and strict supervision, but was this not 
their duty in regard to the entire flock entrusted to them ? Hence 
Diocesan Institutes of Simple vows were multiplied, which, 
when their field of labor extended beyond the diocesan border, 
sought the protection and the approval of the Holy See. 

Among these the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries produced 
the following: 25 the Sisters of St. Catharine (1571), the Anglican 
Sisters, famous in the Constitutions of Clement XI and Benedict 
XIV, the Company of St. Ursula (1606), the Sisters of Our 



24 Ibid. 

25 Ibidem et Bizzarri, "Analectanea" et Battandier, "Guide Canonique." 



28 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

Lady of Calvary (1614), the Institute of Mary (1626), the 
Sisters of Martha (1634), the Sisters of St. Charles Borromeo 
(1651), the Soeurs de la Croix (1625), the Daughters of Calvary 
(1619), the Institute of Our Lady of Charity and Refuge (1641), 
the Daughters of the Immaculate Conception (1680), the Notre 
Dames of Montreal (1657), the Sisters of the Holy Child Jesus 
(1666), the Visitation Sisters of Ghent (1660), and the Sisters 
of Charity (1631). All but two of these received a certain recog- 
nition from the Holy See within the seventeenth century. Fer- 
rari and Vermeersch, however, insist that the first formal appro- 
bation of Constitutions of Religious Congregations of Simple 
vows given by the Holy See, was that of Clement XI in the Brief, 
"Inscrutabili" (July 13, 1703), to the Constitutions of Anglican 
Sisters (Vermeersch, De Rel. Inst, et Pers., vol. I, p. 45). Prob- 
ably the greatest difficulty was experienced by the Institute of 
St. Vincent de Paul. The Holy See was most insistent on mak- 
ing this Institute a strict Order and for many years refused to 
stamp it with ecclesiastical approval. St. Vincent, however, 
persevered in his efforts and finally his arguments prevailed with 
the Holy See. Time has proved the wisdom of his counsels, 
for the Sisters of Charity today outnumber any single Religious 
Order or Community within the Church. No less than seventy- 
five thousand heroic women, true to the principles and spirit of 
St. Vincent de Paul, devote their lives to the assistance of the 
poor and afflicted in almost every corner of the world. 

The eighteenth century added about nine approved Institutes 
to the catalogue of Religious Congregations of women. But in 
the nineteenth century they multiply even more rapidly. Dr. 
H. Hohn in his work "Vocations" enumerates at least one hundred 
and fifty. 

In all these Institutes the distinctive feature differentiating them 
from the strict Orders, is the change from the Solemn to the 
Simple vows and in many cases the absence of the Cloister. 
Vows, however, remained. They formed their very essence and 
generally their number was three or more. But in the seventeenth 
century we find an instance of a Society of Religious with only 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 29 

one vow, viz., that of stability. This Institute was that of the 
Daughters of Calvary founded in 1619. In the following century 
the Holy See even approved the Sisters of Christian Retreat 
(1787) who made no vows — surely a mode of procedure hardly 
explainable when viewed in the light of former legislation. 

Here it must be noticed that Rome's approval of Religious 
Congregations for women was for many centuries only a qualified 
one. John XXII, as seen above, permitted certain Institutes to 
exist under Episcopal jurisdiction, but expressly added that he 
nowise meant to approve their Institutes. This attitude of 
the Holy See continued throughout many centuries. In the 
famous Constitution, "Quamvis justo," Benedict XIV repeats 
the position of the Holy See in the following words: "Earum 
conservatoria tolerari quidem ab hac apostolica Sede, sed Insti- 
tutum ipsum nee approbatum nee confirmatum est (esse) ; ob- 
sistentibus Sacris Canonibus et generali Constitutione Sancti Pii 
V, ne religiosae mulierum Domus Apostolica confirmatione stabi- 
liantur, quae se perfectae clausurae legibus non obstrinxerint." 
In 1816 the Sisters of Charity of Jesus and Mary petitioned the 
Holy See to approve their Rules and Solemn profession. This 
would have been equivalent to an approval of the Institute. 
Hence the Holy See still refused such a request and simply an- 
swered that the Rules "Plane commendandae . . . et lauda- 
bili fini plurimum.accomodatae" (Sept. 24, 1816).. 

Roman approval of an Institute's Constitutions up to the 19th 
century invariably added the explicit words : "Citra tamen appro- 
bationem conservatorii." But in the beginning of the ninteenth 
century the traditional phrase began to be omitted, though no 
formal approval was yet given. The first formal approval of 
an Institute does not appear before 1821. According to Biz- 
zarri this was bestowed upon the Institute of the Daughters of 
the Blessed Virgin Mary (Collectanea, p. 861). 

Furthermore Roman approval has more and more eliminated 
the multiplication of independent Religious houses, and placed 
a general and supreme power in a Superior General. In the 
Constitution "Quamvis justo," which opens the new era for Re- 



30 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

ligious Congregations, Benedict XIV expressly emphasizes that 
he is not speaking of Institutes under a general direction (of 
which he mentions but four as existing at his time) but of dio- 
cesan Societies: "Nee agitur de tali superiorissa generali, quae 
amplam quandam jurisdictionam in subditas exercere, ipsaque 
ab ordinaria Episcopi auctoritate exempta esse debeat." What 
is here referred to as an exception, has become in the last century 
a fairly general rule and the former rule a very rare exception. 
New Religious Congregations are placed under the immediate 
care and direction of the Holy See to increase efficiency and to 
provide better government. Therefore general laws are laid 
down to facilitate Roman recognition. Therefore, too, the time- 
worn phrase "citra tamen approbationem conservatorii" has dis- 
appeared and independent houses of Religious are diminished 
more and more. Leo XIII exerted the greatest influence in this 
direction. From particular and tried precepts he has formed 
general laws. His successor, Pius X, has added to this general 
legislation so that almost every phase of Religious life, at least 
the external relations, has been generalized and harmonized as 
will appear more explicitly as these pages increase. 

What percentage of the actually existing Religious bodies is 
thus minutely ruled and directed by the Holy See, is difficult to 
say. The number, status and personnel of all the Diocesan Insti- 
tutes within the twelve hundred Dioceses of the Catholic world, 
is yet unwritten history. 26 But one can hazard a comparison 
when considering the many Institutes and their inmates within 
our country. 

The first Religious Community of women in what is now the 
United States seems to have come from France. The Governor 
of New Orleans urged the Ursuline Nuns of Rouen in 1726 to 
accept the appeal of the American French to institute a Mon- 
astery in the New World. According to the authoress of "The 
Religious Orders in the United States," these Ursuline Nuns 



26 i( 



Annuario Pontificio," 1915. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 31 

were the pioneers of the virginal soil in the United States. They 
opened the first educational institution for young women, the first 
orphanage and the first hospital in the United States in that 
same year. In the Colonies of the Eastern shores, several young 
maidens had crossed the Ocean and joined the exiled English 
Carmelites at Antwerp. With the declaration of religious free- 
dom in our country, the Rev. Ig. Mathews of Washington wrote 
to the Mother Bernardina of the Carmelites of Antwerp (his 
sister) : "Now is the time to found in this country, for peace is 
declared and religion is free." The result was the establishing 
of a Carmelite Community near Port Tobacco, Md., 1790. Two 
years later some Poor Clares were driven from France and 
sought a home on our shores. They founded a convent at 
Georgetown, but for some reason or other their venture proved 
a failure and the good Nuns were recalled to their European home 
in 1800. 27 However, the abandoned convent became the home 
of the first American Religious Congregation. A certain Miss 
Labor, of Philadelphia, under the guidance of Father Neale, 
later Bishop Neale, was its foundress. With the advice of 
Father Neale the young Community of teachers chose the Visi- 
tation Rule of St. Francis de Sales. Bishop Carroll in 1808 ad- 
vised Bishop Neale to prescribe the Simple vows for the new 
Congregation. Yielding to the wishes of Bishop Carroll, the 
Sisters took their first Simple vows. But it was the desire of 
Bishop Neale to introduce the entire regime of the Visitations. 
Consequently he obtained from the Holy See in 1816 the privi- 
lege of changing the Community into the Order of the Visitation 
with Solemn vows and Cloister. The new foundations of the 
Visitations Nuns in Mobile, St. Louis and Kaskaskia likewise 
inherited the privileges of their Mother house. 28 But outside of 
these the strict Orders of women have never been permitted to 
perpetuate their Institutes with Solemn vows in the United States. 



27 E. T. Dehey, o. c. ; H. Hohn, o. c. 

18 E. T. Dehey. o. c. ; C. of Baltimore II, 1866; Sabetti-Barrett, Theol. 
Mar. p. 417. 



32 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

With the founding of the Sisters of Charity by Mother Seton 
in 1809 at Emmittsburg, Md., and the Sisters of Loretto by 
Father Nernickx, in 1812 at Harden's Creeks, Ky., that flourish- 
ing Religious life of the Church in the United States began. 29 
Its growth has developed so wonderfully that today more than 
one hundred and fifty Religious Communities with a total mem- 
bership of more than seventy thousand Sisters — besides the 
many novices and postulants — devote all their efforts to the fur- 
therance of Catholic life and progress in every part of the 
country. 30 The Church as a kind Mother appreciates their work 
and in the person of the Sovereign Pontiff praises them and bids 
them prosper: "Profecto sodalitatum istiusmodi tarn bene de 
Ecclesia deque ipsa civili societate merentium, sperandum est, 
numquam def uturam copiam : hodieque libet agnoscere, usque 
adeo eos increbuisse, ut nullum videatur esse ministrandae cari- 
tatis christianae genus, quod illae reliquum f ecerint." 31 



29 E. T. Dehey, o. c. 

80 Catholic Directory for 1915. 

n Motu proprio : "Dei providentis," July 16, 1906. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 33 



CHAPTER III. 



The Founding and Approval of Religious Congregations. 



The law of Innocent III, laid down in the Lateran Council, 
has never been abrogated and therefore constitutes the norm 
of present ecclesiastical discipline: "Firmiter prohibemus nequis 
de caetero novam Religionem inveniat." 1 The same was repeated 
by Gregory X in the Council of Lyons : u Ne aliquis de caetero 
novam Ordinem aut Religionem adinveniat." 2 The founding, 
consequently, of a new Order with Solemn vows certainly re- 
quires the explicit consent of the Holy See. The greater number 
of Canonists interpret these canons as extending also to Religious 
Congregations. 3 But, notwithstanding the prohibition, new In- 
stitutes arose even under the tutelage and the approbation of 
Bishops. Upon this custom the Holy See looked silently for 
many centuries, thus permitting it to grow into a definite law 
which Leo XIII formally acknowledges in the Const. "Conditae 
a Christo.'' He says : "Some Congregations have obtained the 
approval of Bishops . . . and others have besides this a 
decree of the Roman Pontiff issued in their favor ; the former 
have been established and exist by the sole will of the Bishop 
. . . It is therefore the Bishop's privilege not to receive into 
his diocese any newly founded Congregation before he knows 
and has approved its rules and constitutions." 

In 1906 Pius X qualified the rights of Bishops in regard to 
founding or permitting the foundation of a new Institute. 4 In 



1 C. 9, tit. 36, X, lib. III. 

2 C. 3, tit. XVII, lib. Ill, in 6°. 

3 Sebastianelli, De Personis, p. 358 ; Suarez, de Relig. T. Ill, 1. 

4 Motu proprio, "Dei providentis," July 16, 1906. 



M RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

the first article of the "Motu proprio," he lays down the principle : 
"Nullus Episcopus aut cuius loci Ordinarius, nisi habita Apos- 
tolicae Sedis per litteras licentia, novam alterutrius sexus sodali- 
tatem condat aut in sua dioecesi condi permittat." Bishops, 
Abbots Nullius, Vicars Apostolic and Prefects Apostolic are there- 
fore denied exercise of their right of founding a new Religious 
Institute without the consent of the Holy See. 

No doubt exists in the minds of Canonists that by the terms, 
"Sodality," "Family," and "Religious Institutes," the decree em- 
braces all Religious Organizations that lead a life after the man- 
ner of Religious. Whether or not the vows, oath, or mere prom- 
ise form the bond of union and perseverance, matters nothing 
in the present legislation. The Holy See simply prescribes that, 
in the foundation of every Religious Institute, she must be con- 
sulted through the proper Congregation. 

The Roman Congregation competent, according to the deer. 
"Dei providentis," to receive and deliberate upon the application 
of the Bishop, was the S. Congr. EE et RR. But with the re- 
organization of the Roman Curia in 1908, this Congregation has 
been abolished and its work divided among several Congregations. 
Under the present arrangement the S. Congr. de Religiosis dis- 
charges the affairs of Religious and therefore ordinarily examines 
and approves the application for new Institutes. 5 The modifica- 
tions and exceptions to this general law will be treated later, when 
we speak of pontifical approval. 

What the Congregation wishes to examine (and therefore also 
demands the corresponding information in the application) is 
especially the name, the character and purpose of the proposed In- 
stitute and of its founder. Then, in regard to the members of 
the prospective society, the habit for the Novices and the Pro- 
fessed respectively must be specified. Finally, the principles and 
rules which form the basis for this approbation must be drawn 
from the Const. "Conditae a Christo," and the "Normae" of 
1901. 



1 Const. "Sapienti consilio," June 28, 1908. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 35 

The deer. "Dei providentis" admonishes Bishops to keep these 
same prescriptions in mind, when they approve the rules and con- 
stitutions of new Institutes. This admonition hardly means that 
the "Normae" must form the sole rule for every Community, 
because the purpose and scope of an Institute may not permit 
this. Then, too, posterior legislation has frequently laid down 
general laws in contradiction to them. But it seems that the 
Holy See intends that the statutes of future Congregations shall 
harmonize with the "Normae" wherever possible. 

It is self-evident that neither the Ordinary nor the Institute 
itself may change anything that the Holy See has passed upon. 
For such a change requires the consent of the Holy See. 6 How- 
ever, this quasi-approbation does not withdraw the Institute 
from the jurisdiction of the Bishop. It remains entirely subject 
to the Bishop in accordance with the principles of the "Conditae 
a Christo," except only in matters already determined by the 
Holy See. 

What then is pontifical approbation proper? According to 
Leo XIII, it is the favorable recognition and approval of the 
rules and constitutions of an Institute by the Holy See. 7 The 
approbation of only the Institute, exclusive of the rules and con- 
stitution, constitutes a truly papal approval, but an imperfect 
one. In virtue of this action of the Holy See, "it is necessary 
that the Bishop's authority should be regulated and restricted 
within certain limits. What these limits should be may be gath- 
ered from the manner in which the Holy See approves similar 
associations, and which consists in approving a Congregation as 
a Religious Society with Simple vows under the authority of a 
Superior General, without prejudice to the jurisdiction of the 
Ordinaries, according to the sacred canons and the Apostolic 
Constitutions." 8 The Const, of Leo XIII calls this intervention 



"Deer. "Dei providentis," July 16, 1906. 
1 Const. "Conditae a Christo." 
'Ibid. 



36 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

of the Holy See "comprobatio," as it were, acknowledging the 
approbation of the Bishop. 

It is well here to draw attention to some necessary distinctions. 
We saw above that the Holy See has approved and adopted four 
"Rules," and forbidden the introduction of new ones, at least for 
Orders. Now, many Congregations have chosen one of these 
"Regulae" for their norm of life. This chosen and approved 
Rule must not be confounded with the approval spoken of by 
Leo XIII. The III Plenary Council of Baltimore declares that 
the adoption of an approved Rule does not withdraw an Institute 
from the jurisdiction of the Ordinary : "Instituta dioecesana 
. . . licet Regulam a S. Sede approbatam sequantur, depend- 
ent ab Ordinario." 9 The same must be said of Institutes which 
adopt the "Normae" of 1901 for their exclusive rule. Although 
the Holy See has framed the aforesaid "Normae" and commanded 
that they should be the models for future Institutes, yet such 
adoption does not constitute an approved Congregation. 

Furthermore, as the preliminary examination and permission 
required by the deer. "Deo providentis" does not constitute ap- 
proval in the sense that the Institute becomes pontifical, so also 
Rome's formal praise of the founder's intention or of the Insti- 
tute's work, cannot be understood as pontifical approbation. The 
"Normae" (Art. 1) say such an Institute "manet in statu pri- 
vati et omnino dioecesani sodalicii." Now, the process of ap- 
proval will appear clearer. 

The practice of the Roman Curia permits of four stages in the 
process of approving an Institute. The decrees expressing the 
nature and extent of this pontifical approbation are termed re- 
spectively "Decretum laudis," "Decretum approbationis instituti," 
"Decretum approbationis constitutionum ad experimentum" and 
finally "Decretum approbationis definitivae." 10 The significance 
of the different decrees is quite evident. The "Decretum laudis" 



9 III. C. Bait. n. 93 ; Sebastianelli, 1. c, p. 358. 
16 Normae, Art. 2-4. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 37 

embodies a general praise and recommendation of the Institute, 
and places it under the direct jurisdiction of the Holy See, at 
least for the time being, until a more thorough investigation of 
the Institute and its Constitution has been made. 11 This transi- 
tory stage is terminated by the "Decretum approbationis instituti." 
Frequently the two pronouncements are combined in the one 
decree of praise and approbation. 12 At any rate its import is to 
assign a definite and canonical status to the Institute with the 
authoritative declaration that the Institute contains nothing contrary 
to good morals or propriety, and that, per se, it is calculated to 
lead its members to perfection. 13 

By the "Decretum approbationis constitationum ad experi- 
mentum" a certain number of years are prescribed for testing the 
practicability of the rules, — generally from five to ten. After 
the lapse of this period, and when due corrections have been 
made, the "Decretum approbationis definitivae" will be given. 14 
This decree renders the rules "canon law and a public and sol- 
emnly recognized way of perfection/' 15 The word "law" must 
here be taken in its directive, and not preceptive, sense, for even 
after this approval the rules do not "per se" bind under sin : 
"Ipsas per se sub nullo culpae reatu obligare ; non tamen excusare 
a culpa eum qui easdem transgrederetur ex contemptu vel in ma- 
teria contraria votis Dei Ecclesiaeve praeceptis." 16 

Note that this ordinary procedure is not always followed. 
Some times the Holy See omits all preliminaries and includes in 
a single decree the various approbations. 17 



11 Ibid., Art. 2. 

12 Ibid., Art. 6. 

J3 Suarez, de Rel., VII, II, XVII, n. 17. 

14 "Normae," aa. 21, 22; Vermeersch, de Rel. Inst, er Pers., Vol. II, c. 
2, n. 13. 

" Vermeersch, Cath. Encycl. under "Religious." 

16 "Normae," Art. 320. 

17 Ibid., Art. 23 ; Vermeersch, o. c, Vol. II, c. 2. 



38 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

The conditions and formalities required on the part of the 
applicant for obtaining the pontifical approbation are not clearly 
and definitely laid down in the Canon law. But ordinarily the 
Holy See will readily approve an Institute, "positis ponendis," 
the activity of which extends to two or more dioceses. For in 
this case an occasion for a conflict of authority arises which gen- 
erally hampers effectiveness. This principle is certainly deducible 
from the Const. "Conditae a Christo." Furthermore, the Latin- 
American Council (1899) gives the same reason for inducing such 
Institutes to seek pontifical approbation. 

But the nearest approach to positive formalities, are the norms 
laid down by the Holy See to guide the "Commission" in approv- 
ing new Institutes and their constitutions. 18 They are, there- 
fore, indirectly imposed upon every Institute seeking approbation. 

The first requisite demanded by the "Normae peculiares" 
(March 4, 1914) comprises a full account of the personal, moral, 
and economic status of the Institute. No specific directions are 
given. Evidently a complete answer to the ninety-eight questions 
of the "Instructio" (July 16, 1906), which refers to the tri- 
ennial account of the Religious Congregations to the Holy See, 
would very probably meet all the demands of the S. Congrega- 
tion. Since, moreover, Institutes founded after 1906 are ex- 
pected to be conformable to the "Normae" of 1901, the Holy 
See can well demand a report on the actual agreement or dis- 
agreement with these norms. 

Next in importance are the testimonials from the various 
Bishops in whose dioceses the Institute is located. The Holy 
See insists on those for the reason that pontifical sanction entails 
a diminution of episcopal authority and jurisdiction. Prudence, 
therefore, requires that the Ordinary's viewpoint and report be 
presented and considered. 

The chief work of the Apostolic See is necessarily centered on 
the constitutions of the Institute. For this reason the Holy See 



""Normae peculiares," March 24, 1914. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 39 

deems it necessary that ten copies of the same accompany the 
application so that the various examiners may be accommodated. 
It goes without saying that this work involves considerable ex- 
pense Hence sufficient funds must be deposited to cover the 
possible outlay. 

In case the information forwarded to the Holy See is insuffi- 
cient, the moderator of the Community must supply the deficiency 
by obeying a summons to appear personally before the board of 
examiners. 

According to the present discipline the S. Congr. de Religiosis 
possesses the right and duty to approve New Institutes and 
their Constitutions. 19 The "Normae peculiares" supplementing- 
the Const. "Sapienti consilio" say : "Decretum quo laudatur proba- 
turque institutum aliquod, et decretum approbationis constitu- 
tionun, itemque substantialis mutatio quaevis in iam probatis 
institutis inducenda, ad plenam congregationem semper pertinent," 
i. e., Congregationem de Religiosis. This was modified by a later 
decree of the Holy See which created a special Commission for 
the sole object of approving Religious Institutes and their consti- 
tutions. 20 

The personnel of this Commission is composed of the Cardinal 
Prefect of the S. Congregation for Religious and a board of con- 
sultcrs chosen by him from among the regular consultors of 
the same Congregation. According to the "Annuario Pontificio" 
for L915, six consultors serve on this Commission. 

Its competency is defined by the decree as embracing "omnia 
quae ad novi cuiuslibet Instituti votorum simplicium, euisdemque 
constitutionem examen et approbationem attinent, nisi speciali 
ex causa, vel exortis inter commissionis consultores gravibus 
opiiionum discrepantiis, Cardinalis Praefectus opportunius iudi- 
cavirit ad E'morum Patrum coetum rem deferre." A literal 
interpretation does not show this faculty to be coextensive with 



"Const. "Sapienti consilio," June 28, 1908. 
"Deer. "Peculiar! curae," March 24, 1914. 



40 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

the powers of the S. Congr. de Religiosis on the same subject- 
matter as defined in the "Normae peculiares," c. VIII, a. V, n. 6, of 
1908 (q. v. supra). For no mention is made of the "substantialis 
mutatio quaevis in iam probatis institutis inducenda." Besides 
explicit reference is made only to "Instituta Votorum Simplicium." 
Apparently, however, the purpose of the law embraces also In- 
stitutes without vows, as well as deliberation on notable changes 
proposed on constitutions already approved. For the express 
intention of the legislator is to relieve the Congregation cf this 
subject-matter except in extraordinary cases of disagreement 
when the affair must be submitted to the entire Congregation. 
There seems little doubt that when such cases arise, the new 
Commission will have little difficulty in disposing of them. 

Here another doubt suggests itself in regard to the quasi- 
approval required for the formation of diocesan Institutes. It 
seems reasonable to infer that the Commission will likewise fall 
heir to this duty. For it would be rather strange if the entire 
Congregation were to examine and direct the initiative steps of 
an Institute, but afterwards assign the complete approval 1o the 
Commission. 

The Commission, in the entire mode of procedure, is ii the 
hands of the Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation. 21 He ap- 
points the Secretary of the Commission, and directs all cocu- 
ments and testimonials to be delivered to him. He designates 
one of the consultors to make a thorough study of the documents 
and the constitutions. The result of his investigation, together 
with a printed copy of the constitutions, are transmitted to each 
of the associate consultors. These, in turn, are given ten days 
consideration. Thereupon the entire Commission meets to dis- 
cuss in detail the merits and demerits of the Institute and its 
Constitution. The principals to guide them in their deliberation 
are those laid down in Common law, Pontifical Constitutions and 
especially the "Normae" of 1901. Of prime importance, lx>w- 



'Normae peculiares c." 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 41 

ever, are the constitutions "Conditae a Christo," "Dei provi- 
dentis," "Sapienti consilio," and "Romanus Pontifex." After 
the matter has been thoroughly considered, each consultor is 
obliged to set forth his opinion in the general assembly. Should 
it be impossible to agree in essential matters the case is to be 
referred to the entire Congregation. Finally, the result is com- 
municated to the Religious Institute, after the approval of the 
Holy Father has been granted. 

It is well known that prior to the Const. "Sapienti consilio," 
Religious Institutes whose mother house was situated in the 
territory of the S. Congr. de Prop. Fide, as well as those Insti- 
tutes whose special aim was the mission-field proper, were sub- 
ject to the S. Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith. 
It therefore also approved new Institutes and their Constitutions. 
But with the Introduction of the new discipline this Congregation's 
competency with regard to Religious was limited even within its 
own territory: "Quod vero spectat ad sodales religiosos, eadem 
Congregatio sibi vindicet quidquid religiosos qua missionaries, 
sive uti singulos, sive simul sumptos tangit. Quidquid vero re- 
ligiosos qua tales, sive uti singulos, sive simul sumptos attingit, 
ad Congregationem religiosorum negotiis praepositam remittat 
aut relinquat." - From this it seems that the approval of Re- 
ligious Institutes, other than purely missionary Communities and 
those of the Oriental Rite, is no longer proper to the S. Congr. 
de Prop. Fide. These two exceptions are verified by the S. 
Congr. de Prop. Fide approving the Constitutions of the Ar- 
menian Mechitharists in 1909, and the Missonary Society of 
Maryknoll in the United States in 1915. 23 

In concluding this chapter it may be expedient to refer briefly 
to Institutes whose status is doubtful. The Const. "Conditae a 



^"Sapienti consilio," P. I, c. 9, art. 6; cfr. Ojetti, o. c, p. 100; Capello, 
o. c, p. 230. 

2S Deer. S. C. de Prop. Fide, Aug. 6, 1909. and the "Deer, laudis et appro- 
bationis," July 15, 1915. 



42 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

Christo" makes no infringement on existing customs and privi- 
leges : "Nihil penitus derogari volumus de facultatibus vel privi- 
leges . . . immemorabli aut seculari consuetudine confirma- 
tis." If, therefore, an Institute possesses no positive proof of 
pontifical approbation, it must be considered a diocesan Institute, 
for the Bishop's ordinary rights cede only to positive proof to 
the contrary. Again, what of approved Institutes over which 
the Bishop has exercised full jurisdiction since the Const. "Con- 
ditae a Christo" ? It is a principle of Canon law that jurisdiction 
can be acquired by custom ; and probably ten years suffice for 
this. If, therefore, a Bishop has exercised jurisdiction over an 
approved Institute for ten years, it follows that notwithstanding 
the "Decretum laudis et approbationis," the Institute is truly dio- 
cesan. 24 



»4 



Vermeersch. Periodica, Vol. VIII, p. (28). 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 43 



CHAPTER IV. 



Entrance Into a Religious Congregation. 



Entrance into a Religious Congregation is the admission of a 
candidate in due form by competent authority. This may also 
be called external vocation to the Religious state. No one has 
a strict right to be admitted into a Religious Society, no matter 
how holy his intention or how urgent his desires. Pius 
X has sanctioned this truth in regard to the sacerdotal state: 
"Neminem habere unquam ius ullum ad ordinationem antecedenter 
ad liberam electionem Episcopi." a What is here affirmed of 
the ecclesiastical state holds also for the Religious state. 2 Su- 
periors, consequently, violate no principle of justice by refusing 
admittance to any candidate. But may this not be an infringe- 
ment on the right of a divine vocation? Vermeersch says, in 
commenting on the decision of the Roman commission in regard 
to vocations: "Ipsis (superioribus) integrum est ex utilitate 
. . . Instituti . . . de admissione sententiam ferre quae 
nullum ius violat, et quae vocationem perficit quatenus sola effecit 
ut quisquam re vera sit . . . religiosus. Et fit ut quis sancte 
moveatur ad statum petendum . . . religiosum, qui tamen 
iuste repellatur. Deus ipse interdum desideria inspirat quae opere 
compleri non permittit. Quare theologi voluntatem signi a vol- 
untate beneplaciti divini distinguunt." 3 

Anyone, however, who is not hindered by an ecclesiastical im- 
pediment may be admitted to Religious life. On the part of the 
postulant, no more than a good intention and a firm resolution of 



1 Litterae ex Secretaria Status, July 2, 1912. 

2 Vermeersch, Periodica, vol. VI, p. 262, sq. 

3 Ibid., p. 264. 



44 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

serving God in that state together with the necessary moral, mental 
and physical qualities, is required. This is clearly stated by the 
decision of the same Roman Commission : "Nihil plus in ordi- 
nando, ut rite vocetur ab Episcopo, requiri quam rectam inten- 
tionem simul cum idoneitate in iis gratiae et naturae dotibus re- 
posita, et per earn vitae probitatem ac doctrinae sufficientiam 
comprobata, quae spem fundatam faciant fore et sacerdotii munera 
recte obire eiusdemque obligationes sancte servare queat; esse 
egregie laudandum." Certainly no more is demanded for the 
Religious state. Fr. Vermeersch says of these conditions : 
"Haec qui habeat ingressum ... in religionem postulare 
potest, immo et eo laudabilius postulabit quo in dicto statu con- 
silia Christi magis presse sequatur." 4 Aside, therefore, from 
God's grace which begins, accompanies and perfects every good 
act, internal vocation proper is more the "result of deliberation 
according to the principles of reason and faith" than the effect 
of individual aspiration or the internal movements of the Holy 
Ghost. In extraordinary cases, however, "supernatural light may 
be so abundantly shed upon the soul as to render deliberation 
unnecessary." As to the Priesthood the contrary is expressly 
denied by the Holy See: "Conditionem quae ex parte Ordinandi 
debet attendi, quaeque Vocatio Sacerdotalis appellator, nequaquam 
consistere, saltern necessario et de lege ordinaria, in interna 
quadam aspiratione subiecti seu invitamentis Spiritus Sancti, ad 
sacerdotium ineundum." 5 

The mental, physical and moral qualities, or as the above men- 
tioned Letter expresses it, the "idoneitas in iis gratiae et naturae 
dotibus reposita, et per earn vitae probitatem ac doctrinae suffi- 
cientiam comprobata," are provided for by natural and ecclesiasti- 
cal law in the form of impediments which render the Religious 
profession invalid or illicit respectively. 



4 Ibid. 

"' Lit. cit, supra. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 45 

Formerly the Religious profession in an Institute other than 
the approved Orders was both illicit and invalid in virtue of 
ecclesiastical law. 6 But this prohibition has long since passed into 
desuetude as was seen in the last chapter. It, therefore, need no 
longer be reckoned with as an impediment. All Religious Insti- 
tutes approved by Bishop or by Pope are "per se" open to the 
aspirant to the Religious life. 

The perfect use of reason, however, is so essential for the 
Religious profession that its absence constitutes a natural im- 
pediment which in no wise can be dispensed with. It matters 
little whether its cause be immaturity or a physical defect. The 
weighty obligations assumed in Religion require full deliberation, 
the lack of which, by the natural law, bars a person from becom- 
ing a Religious. It is hardly necessary to refer to the antiquated 
custom of parents offering children to Religion in fulfillment of 
a vow. These "Oblates" never became Religious except by their 
own free act upon attaining the use of reason. This ancient cus- 
tom has no practical value today, since it is merely a question of 
history and opposed to all ecclesiastical practice and legislation. 7 

On the contrary the Church requires in the candidate for Re- 
ligion an age and a development which, under normal circum- 
stances, insure not only full use of reason, but also stability of 
character. The Council of Trent demands that the Solemn pro- 
fession of Religion be not made before the completion of the 
sixteenth year (Sess. XXV, c. 16). Pius X forbids lay 
Brothers to make the perpetual profession before their thirtieth 
year ("Sacrosancta," Jan. 7, 1911). Truly, neither of these 
laws directly include Congregations. But they are at least di- 
rective for all Religious Institutes (Wernz, o. c. vol. Ill, n. 628 
and in note 222). Moreover, in the absence of a general law 
for Religious Institutes in this matter, the Holy See is accus- 
tomed to insert the law of Regulars in the special indults of ap- 



6 Supra, c. II, pp. i7, 18. 

7 Wernz, "Ius Decretalium," vol. Ill, n. 628 and in note (188), 



46 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

proval (Wernz, o. c. ; Battandier, o. c. n. 57). In Institutes of 
clerics, however, the Holy See requires to be observed not only 
the age limit of Trent but also the completion of the gymnasium 
course of studies (Deer. S. C. de Rel. super "Auctis admodum" 
art. 6, Sept. 7, 1909). In countries which have not the Italian 
system of education and grading, this would be equivalent to the 
completion of those studies which precede the philosophical course 
according to the particular systems (Vermeersch, Periodica, vol. 
V,p. 44). 

But not all persons capable of choosing the Religious state, 
have access to it. One cannot become a participant of the 
spiritual favors of the Church unless he be in communion with 
Her. Hence, since infidels, heretics, schismatics and excommuni- 
cated are incapable of receiving the graces of Religion, while they 
remain so, they are by ecclesiastical law forbidden to be incor- 
porated into a Religious Institute. 8 

There are other persons whose duties in life prevent them from 
entering Religious Orders and Institutes. Among these, persons 
in wedlock may be considered as taking the first place. Common 
law, however, makes some exceptions especially in favor of the 
strict Orders. Thus "per se" a married person could enter Re- 
ligion with the consent of the other party. Again, if one had 
forfeited the rights of Marriage by adultery or by apostasy, the 
other party, "positis ponendis," is free to choose the Religious 
state. 9 Some Canonists are not at all certain that this regulation 
in Common law may be vindicated in favor of Religious Congre- 
gations. 10 The same uncertainty prevails in extending the privi- 
leges of Common law which grants persons in wedlock two months 
within which they may choose the Religious state provided the 



*Decr. S. C. EE. et RR., Nov. 25, 1898, in Anal. eccl. T. VII, p. 284; 
Wernz, o. c, vol. Ill, p. 295. 

9 Wernz. 1. c, n. 628; Sebastianelli, de Pers, p. 370. 

10 Wernz. 1. c. ; Bastien, o. c, p. 45; Battandier, o. c, p. 58. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 47 

marriage is not consummated. 11 But it is certain that a ratified 
(ratum) marriage is not dissolved by the profession of Simple 
vows. 12 . 

Closely related to the matrimonial bond is the contract of 
betrothment. It is generally admitted that the sponsalitial con- 
tract does not bind in prejudice to Religious life, even in Insti- 
tutes where the Religious state exists only imperfectly. 13 

When the state of Matrimony is blessed with children, there 
arises such an intimate bond between parents and children, and 
also between brothers and sisters, that at least their extreme needs 
must be provided for even at the sacrifice of joining, or at the 
expense of deserting, the Religious life. This has always been 
the teaching of the Church and Moralists. In the case of brothers 
and sisters, however, the voice of nature is not so urgent as in 
the case of parents, at least not when there arises only a grave 
necessity which could be provided for otherwise. But even then 
Theologians without hesitation maintain that one should, or at 
least may, postpone entrance into a Religious Institute. 14 

A union similar to that of wedlock exists between the spiritual 
pastor and his flock. Wherefore the sacred Canons prohibit the 
Bishop, even a Titular, from entering Religion without the special 
permission of the Holy See. 15 As to priests and clerics the 
privilege renewed by Benedict XIV obtains: "Clericus potest 
transire ad Religionem, non petita licentia, etiamsi contradica- 



11 c. 7, Tit. 32, X, lib. Ill; Gasparri, de Matr. n. 437, Noldin, Theol. 
Mor., vol. Ill, n. 522; and De Sexto, n. 84. 

12 C. of Trent, sess. XXIV, can. 6, de ref . ; Wernz, 1, c.; Bargilliat, 
Praelectiones J. C, n. 1106; Sebastianelli, I. c., p. 369. 

"Gasparri, o. c. vol. I, n. 145, 146; De Smet, "Betrothment and Mar- 
riage," vol. I, p. 30; Wernz. o. c., vol. Ill, n. 628. 

M St. Thomas, "Summa," II, II, q. 169 ; St. Alphonsus, Theol. Moral., lib. 
VI, 66; Wernz, 1. c. ; Bastien, o. c., n. 86. 

15 C. 18, Tit. 31, X, lib. Ill; C. 2, Tit. 7, X. lib. Ill; C. 10, Tit. 10, X, lib. 
I; Benedict XIV, Const. "Ex quo," Jan. 14, 1747. 



48 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

tur." 16 Since this privilege refers to the perfect Religious state, 
Institutes, in which the three perpetual vows of poverty, chastity 
and obedience are not made, are excluded: "Nous ne pensons 
pas," says Bastien, "que Ton puisse etendre ce privilege aux 
associations des pretres qui n'emettent pas les trois voeux. p. ex. 
les Lazarists, les pretres de St. Sulpice, etc., le mobile de la dispense 
faisant defaut." 17 The Holy See excepts from the general privi- 
lege students of some Pontifical Colleges and priests ordained 
"sub titulo missionis." As to the students of such Pontifical 
Colleges the following oath must be taken: "Spondeo et iuro, 
me, quandiu hoc in collegio commorabor, et postquam, sive studiis 
expletis, sive, secus, quavis de causa, hide discessero, nulli re- 
ligiosae familiae aut societati vel congregationi regulari nomen 
daturum, nee in earum ulla professionem emissurum, sine spe- 
ciali Apostolicae Sedis licentia." 18 A similar oath is generally 
taken by candidates for the priesthood "sub titulo missionis." 19 
Wherefore the Holy See has declared : "Eis, qui hoc titulo ( Mis- 
sionis) sunt ordinati, vi praestiti iuramenti interdicitur in Re- 
ligionem ingredi absque venia S. Sedis." 20 Consequently the 
oath is licit and binding even in prejudice of a higher state. 
But from the S. Congregation's response it is evident that clerics 
ordained under the mission-title must be considered as making 
a voluntary renunciation of the privilege granted by Common 
law rather than as not participating in the same. 

Ordinarily civic duties do not take precedence of the Religious 
life. It is unbecoming, to say the least, that, in times of peace, 



16 Eadem Const., "Ex quo." 

17 O. c. p. 51 in note; Wernz, o. c, vol. Ill, p. 296 and note (212) ; Bouix, 
o. c. p. 459. Responsio S. C. RR. et EE. Jan. 28, 1837. 

18 Const. "Quum Rom. Pontifices," June 28, 1853; Instr. S. C. de prop. 
Fide, April 27, 1871; Bastien, o. c., p. 53 in note 2. The oath is taken 
from the "Relatio Annualis Vicesima Septima" of the Josephinum Ponti- 
fical College, Columbus, Ohio. 

19 Instr. S. C. de Prop. Fide, April 27, 1871; C. of Bait. Ill, p. 204. 
20 Eadem Instr. n. 10. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 49 

aspirants for the Priesthood or for Religion should be compelled 
to render military service to the State and thereby to postpone 
or to desert a higher state. But when governments no longer re- 
gard the rights of the Church (Privilegium exemptionis, cfr. 
Sebastianelli, de Pers., n. 17), prudence suggests that these rights 
be not asserted as long as no direct violation of Divine rights is 
involved. This policy seems to have inspired the new legislation 
of the Church forbidding persons, subject to military service, 
to make the perpetual profession in Religious Orders and Insti- 
tutes, or to receive Holy Orders before this service has been 
rendered. 21 Even when the military demands cover but a few 
months, the Religious profession must be delayed. 22 There is 
one exception to the law, viz., Religious candidates for Orders, 
whose course of studies is within one year of completion, may 
make the perpetual profession, provided they take an oath 
of serving on the foreign Missions until such time that their lia- 
bility to military service has elapsed. 23 

In this category of personal obligations which prevent one 
from embracing the Religious life, commutative justice also must 
be mentioned. Thus the Canons of the Church prohibit the re- 
ception of insolvent debtors and of persons involved in litiga- 
tions. 24 Cases, however, may occur which exclude absolutely 
any possibility of satisfying justice. Such would certainly re- 
ceive the benign consideration of the Church, for She looks more 
to the moral than to the social conditions and necessities of man, 
especially when these do not include personal turpitude. 

Yet the social attitude cannot be altogether ignored, not even 
by Religious Institutes. Nor does the Church ignore it. This 
is evinced especially in the case of illegitimacy. 25 Generally 



21 "Inter Reliquas," Jan. 1, 1911. 

-"Responsio" S. C. de Rel. Feb. 1, 1912. 

23 Ibid., n. 6. 

^Sixtus V, Const. "Cum de omnibus," Nov. 26, 1586; Clement VIII, 
Const. "In suprema," April 2, 1602; Wernz, 1. c, n. 628, 629. 

25 C. 1, tit. 18, X. de fil. presbyt. ; Const. "Cum de omnibus," Nov. 26, 
1587. 



50 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

illegitimacy, and even widowhood by the particular decrees of 
approval are made impediments to Religious Congregations. 26 
Since no general law exists to this effect, Religious Institutes are 
governed solely by their constitutions, except Institutes of priests. 
Illegitimacy is an impediment to Sacred Orders, and therefore it 
necessarily effects Congregations of clerics. 

Quite different is the attitude of the Church towards personal 
and public crime. The Sacred Canons explicitly forbid the re- 
ception of applicants publicly stained. 27 The Papal Constitutions 
refer directly to Religious Orders. Yet there can be no doubt 
that the honor of other Institutes demands this same prohibition 
as will appear from the following regulations. 

Pius X laid down the rigid law for all Religious Institutes of 
men that they may not receive any applicant who has been guilty 
of any offense which entailed dismissal from an Institute of 
learning; "Nullimode, absque speciali venia S. Apostolicae, et 
sub poena nullitatis professionis, excipiantur . . . postu- 
lates, qui e collegiis etiam laicis ob inhonestos mores vel ob alia 
crimina expulsi fuerint." 28 Under a separate decree the same 
law has been extended to Congregations of women. 29 Evidently 
the term "Collegium" cannot be applied to elementary schools, for 
in ecclesiastical language "Collegium" is generally predicated of a 
society of persons acting as a moral unit and connected with some 
sort of common life. 30 It would appear, then, that in the present 
law "Collegium" refers properly to institutes of higher education. 
The law, however, speaks in general terms, and therefore col- 
leges, and universities, whether conducted by clerics or laics, 
by Catholics or non-Catholics, are comprised in the late decrees. 

A further and more stringent precept obtains in case of dismis- 



24 Wernz, 1. c. ; Battandier, o. c, n. 55 ; Bastien, o. c, n. 80 ; Lanslot, n. 75. 

* Const. "'Cum de omnibus," Nov. 26, 1587; "Ad Romanum," Oct. 21, 
1588. 

* Deer. S. C. de Religiosis, "Ecclesia Christi," Sept. 7, 1909. 
*Decr. "Sanctissimus," Jan. 4, 1910. 

89 Vermeersch, Periodica, vol. V, p. (21). 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 51 

sal from vocational schools. The same decrees just quoted 
forbid the reception of postulants who have been expelled 
"quacumque ratione" from Ecclesiastical and Religious seminaries, 
colleges, and domestic school for girls. Ecclesiastical and Re- 
ligious seminaries and colleges are determined not by the status 
of the teaching faculty, but by the aim of the students attending 
these schools. If the students of an Institute are preparing im- 
mediately for the Ecclesiastical or Religious state, the present law 
would certainly find its full application. If, however, the student 
body were preparing for various avocations in life, such Insti- 
tutes Vermeersch thinks could hardly be considered ecclesiastical 
or Religious colleges. 31 But this impediment refers not only to 
moral guilt, but also to mental inability of any cause justifying 
expulsion. 32 

The same ecclesiastical impediment accompanies compulsory 
dismissal from Religious Congregations or Orders. Henceforth 
no Novice or Religious of either sex who has been expelled from 
a Religious Institute or has obtained a dispensation from the 
vows, can enter another Institute or another province of the 
same Institute without the special permission of the Holy See. 33 

It is necessary to make a few observations on these new regu- 
lations of the S. C. de Religiosis, since they entail such severe 
consequences. There is question of dismissal or expulsion in 
the various impediments. Now a virtual (aequivalenter) dis- 
missal or expulsion, i. e., advice to leave on one's own accord in 
order to avoid formal expulsion, is tantamount to an explicit 
dismissal, and, therefore, such a postulant may not be licitly re- 
ceived into any Religous Institute. Since, however, such pro- 
cedure would not be a direct violation of the law, but as Canonists 
say, an evasion "in fraudem legis," the Religious profession would 
be valid, but not licit. If, then, one were advised to discontinue 



81 Vermeersch, Periodica, Vol. V, p. 54. 

82 Ibid, and "Responsio S. C. de Rel.," April 5, 1910. 
33 Deer. "Ecclesia Christi" et "Sanctissimus" cit. 



52 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

his or her studies or leave a Religious Institute for other reasons 
than to avoid dismissal, such a one would not be effected by the 
law ; for voluntary egress from a school or Religious Institute 
is no impediment to joining a Religious Society. Nevertheless 
a sworn testimony is required to show that such a one has not 
been "formaliter vel aequivalenter" dismissed. 34 Nor are postu- 
lants included in the decree, but Novices in the strict sense and 
Religious who have made the Religious profession. Again there 
is reference only to mental or moral causes which effect the 
dismissal. Consequently, merely physical causes such as ill 
health, etc., form no legitimate basis for incurring the penalty 
of the law. Finally the oft-quoted principle of Canonists that 
Rome's legislation for Religious must be restricted exclusively 
to Institutes directly under her authority unless the contrary is 
explicitly stated, finds application here. Hence we may safely 
say, then, that the above precepts of Pius X do not extend to 
diocesan Institutes. This does not, however, exclude them from 
being at least directive norms which Bishops would do well to 
impose on Societies under their jurisdiction. 35 

A final impediment to entering a Religious Institute of the 
Western Church is the Oriental Rite. No person of the Oriental 
Rite can be admitted into a Community of the Occidental Rite 
without the special permisson of the Holy See 36 and the written 
testimony of the postulant's proper Bishop. 37 In case of lay 
Brothers and Sisters, however, recourse to the Holy See is re- 
quired only for a "formal" transfer to the Latin Rite. 38 If, there- 
fore, a candidate does not formally surrender the Oriental Rite, 
he or she would be obliged to follow the same Rite in case dis- 
missal or voluntary egress from the Institute were ever effected. 



34 "Declaratio" S. C. de Rel. April 5, 1910. 

35 Ibidem ; Vermeersch, Periodica, vol. V, pp. 54, 99, 124. 

36 Deer. S. C. de Prop. Fide, June 1, 1885. 

"Lit. Apost. "Orientalium dignitas Ecclesiarum," Nov. 30, 1894; Litterae 
Praefecti S. C. de Prop. Fide, June 15, 1912. 
"Vermeersch, Periodica, Vol. VI, pp. 245, 246. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 53 

This procedure, however, could not be followed by candidates 
for Sacred Orders. No Order or Institute, irrespective of its 
canonical status, may ordain a subject of the Oriental Rite with- 
out the special permission of the Holy See. 

The question now arises in regard to all these impediments, — 
how an Institute may know of their existence or non-existence. 
For this purpose the Holy See has imposed the obligation on all 
Religious Congregations of demanding testimonial letters from 
the postulant's Bishop or Bishops. The decree "Romani Ponti- 
fices" says on this matter: 39 "In quocumque Ordine, Congrega- 
tione, Societate, Instituto, Monasterio, domo, sive in iis emit- 
tantur vota Sollemnia, sive simplicia . . . nemo ad habitum 
admittatur absque testimonialibus litteris turn Ordinarii originis 
turn etiam Ordinarii loci, in quo postulans post expletum decimum 
quintum annum aetatis suae ultra annum moratus f uerit, Ordinarii 
in praefatis litteris testimonialibus exquisiverint, etiam per 
secretas informationes de postulantis qualitatibus, referre debeant 
de ejus natalibus, aetate, moribus, vita, fama, conditione, edu- 
catione, scientia, etc. . . . Et sciant Ordinarii eorum con- 
scientiam super veritate expositorum oneratam remanere, nee 
ipsis unquam liberum esse huiusmodi testimoniales litteras de- 
negare." Here we notice that the testimonials must contain the 
necessary information pertaining to all the impediments touched 
upon in this chapter. Nor can it be said that this law has passed 
into desuetude, for the "Elenchus quaestionum," issued in 1906 
and outlining a certain number of questions which must be re- 
ported upon every third year, states in the tenth question "de 
admissis" : "Institutis Religionum, num litterae testimoniales per 
Decretum Romani Pontifices praescriptae in singulis casibus 
expeditae fuerint." This said decree, "Romani Pontifices," does 
not seem to refer to diocesan Institutes, nor to approved Insti- 
tutes of women. 40 Nor does the Const. "Conditae a Christo" 



Deer. S. C. de Regularibus, Jan. 25, 1848. 
Sebastianelli, o. c, de Pers., n. 334. 



54 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

explicitly speak of these except in reference to testimonial let- 
ters for Institutes of Priests. 41 In regard to diocesan Institutes, 
however, the Const. "Conditae a Christo" says : "De puellis habitum 
religiosum petenibus, item de iis quae probatione expleta, emis- 
surae sint vota, Episcopus singulatim certior fit ; eiusdem erit illas et 
de more explorare et si nihil obstat admittere." 42 Practically this 
obligation includes the information required by the testimonials ; 
for how else could a Bishop judge whether anything objectionable 
as to the candidate exists? As to approved Institutes, the 
"Elenchus" manifests the will of the Holy See, and makes no 
distinction between Institutes of women and men. Therefore 
it would seem to follow that these, too, must demand testimonials 
before receiving postulants. No doubt the Roman approval of 
the individual Communities makes ample provisions for the 
same. At any rate testimonials are demanded of each postulant 
who has left a vocational school, college, seminary, or Religious 
Institute according to the decrees quoted above. 43 

Ordinarily testimonials of Baptism and Confirmation are also 
required of postulants. The "Normae" of 1901 make special 
mention of them. 44 But there does not seem to be a special law 
to this effect, yet the approved constitutions generally demand 
them. 45 

Many, no doubt, find these various prescriptions of the Holy 
See irksome and inconvenient, not to say severe at times. But 
all must admit that they redound to the greater security and glory 
of that state which has produced so many Saints in the Church 
throughout the different centuries. The history of Religious 
Orders and Congregations but too plainly shows that as an Insti- 



41 C. II, n. 6. 

42 C. I, n. 7. 

"Decrs. "Ecclesia Christi" and "Sanctissimus. 
** Normae, Art. 57. 

43 



Wernz, 1. c, in note (204) ; Bastien, o. c, p. 45 ; Battandier, o. c, p. 
61; Lanslot, o. c, p. 44. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 55 

tute neglected the regulations of the Holy See, it deteriorated pro- 
portionately and not seldom reached that irremediable stage 
where dissolution was inevitable ; while strict obedience to 
the precepts of the Holy See has ever seemed to merit the special 
blessing of Providence, by bringing to its doors numerous can- 
didates, a more vigorous spiritual life, and greater fruit of 
sanctity. And little should we wonder that so it should be, in 
order that an Institute may merit benediction from God and in- 
spiration from man. An Institute whose corner stone is obed- 
ience, must first give an example to those whom it calls to join 
its ranks, of readiness to obey in all things, that in it may be 
verified the words of Him who said, "He that followeth Me walk- 
eth not in darkness." 



56 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 



CHAPTER V. 



The Bond of Religious Life. 



The Religious State may be defined "as the mode of life, ir- 
revocable in its nature, of men (hominum) who profess to aim 
at the perfection of Christian Charity in the bosom of the Church 
by the three perpetual vows of poverty, chastity and obedience." 1 
In this precise form the Religious State is the invention of the 
Church. Christ, the Author of perfection, proposed the counsels 
but left the mode of their observance to the individual and the 
Church. If they are to form the foundation of a special state 
of life, some device must be resorted to in order to insure sta- 
bility in their observance. Stability or permanency is the first 
requisite of any state. The very word "state" suggests it. Se- 
bastianelli says : "Status a 'stare/ est quidem vivendi modus cum 
permanentia ex causa non facile mutabili sed perenni" (o. c, vol. 
II, p. 346). How can this be procured? 

Christ has left the way of Christian perfection optional, and 
consequently no authority can make it obligatory. A firm reso- 
lution or a promise may ensure some sort of stability, but hardly 
an irrevocable state. There remains, however, the possibility of 
invoking God in confirmation of a promise or directing the 
promise immediately to Him. Thus a fourfold method of ob- 
serving the counsels or striving after perfection is presented to 
man : the state of perfection may be inaugurated first by a mere 
resolution sustained only by the bond of charity ; secondly, by 
a promise to a legitimate superior, which would add at least the 
obligation of fidelity ; thirdly, by an oath or lastly by a vow, 



1 Vermeersch, Catholic Encyclopedia, "Religious." 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 57 

either of which would strengthen the promise by the bond of 
Religion. Each of these has been chosen as the bond of Re- 
ligious life in Societies approved by the Church. 

In Religious Institutes which are based on the mere bond of 
charity, no more can be required of postulants than the firm 
promise of perseverance. Billuart defines a "propositum" as an 
"actus voluntatis deliberatae, quo quis vult quidem facere id de 
quo deliberat, sed numquam obligat se ad illud faciendum." 2 
If at any time one should for sufficient reason desist from con- 
tinuing in this state of mind, it could not "per se" be imputed 
to him as sin, for "omissio propositi per se non est peccatum." 3 
The "per se" is essential when applying this principle to Religious 
Institutes as will be seen below. Entering such an Institute 
signifies something more than an intention to do something, it 
involves a tacit bilateral contract of not inflicting any injury. 
Therefore, such Institutes have much in common with that class 
which binds its members by a promise of perseverance. But the 
comparative instability of the Religious life in such Institutes 
prevents it from being a true state in the strict meaning of that 
term. 

Those Institutes which exact a formal promise of perseverance, 
oblige themselves to provide for all the spiritual and temporal 
necessities of their members as also not to dismiss members with- 
out a just and grave reason. The postulant in turn pledges per- 
severance and a mode of life in harmony with the principles of 
the Institute, so as not to give just cause for dismissal. 4 In virtue 
of this mutual and onerous contract a strict obligation in justice 
arises : "Promissionem perseverantiae acceptando, ipsa vicissim 
sese obligavit ad gerendam de membro suo convenientem curam ; 



2 "Summa Theol.," vol. IV, dist. IV, a. 1. de Rel. 

3 Noldin, "Summa Theol.," vol. II, n. 209. 

4 Bouix, de Regularibus, vol. II, p. II, p 465 sq. 



58 RFXIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

ita ut verus existat congregationem inter et ipsius membra onero- 
sus contractus. " 5 

If this promise is confirmed by an oath, another obligation of 
perseverance is added to the contract, viz., the obligation of 
religion. By an oath, God is invoked as a witness to the truth 
of the present promise and as a bail and surety of its execution ; 
not indeed in the sense that He assumes the obligation of ful- 
filling the contract, but that He considers its non-fulfillment as a 
direct ofifense against Himself. By an oath, furthermore, God is 
implicitly asked to manifest, either in this life or in the next, the 
truth of what is said. The violation, then, of this promise, to 
which God has added His authority, is not only an infringement 
of justice, but also of reverence due to God. The oath, there- 
fore, must give greater stability to the Religious life. 6 

But neither the onerous contract nor the oath can give irre- 
vocability to the Religious profession. The promise is entirely 
subject to the contracting parties, for "nihil tarn naturale, quam 
eodem genere quodque dissolvere, quo colligatum." 7 And the 
oath necessarily follows the nature of the contract : "Accessorium 
naturam sequi congruit principalis." 8 For this reason the true 
foundation of the Religious state cannot be had in the promise 
or the oath, but must be sought in the vow. 

The Scholastics define the vow as a "promissio Deo facta de 
bono meliori" ; 9 but for our purpose the "de bono meliori" is 
circumscribed by the evangelical counsels of perpetual poverty, 
chastity and obedience, as the definition of the Religious state 
indicates. 10 While Christ gave many counsels, yet the observ- 



5 Bouix, 1. c. ; Suarez, o. c. Tom. 2, Tract. 6, lib. 6, c. 15 ; St. Alphonsus, 
o. c, lib. Ill, Tract. 2, c. 4. 
"Noldin, o. c, vol. II, p. 248 sq. 

7 Reg. juris civilis, 35. 

8 Reg. Jur., 42 in 6°. 

"St. Thomas, "Summa," II, II, qu. 88. a. 1-12. 

10 Suarez, De Religione, Tract. VII, lib. ii, C. 2 ; Sebastianelli, De Regu- 
laribus, n. 319. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 59 

ance of all of them is not necessary for the state of perfection. 
The great obstacles to perfection are the care of things temporal, 
the pleasures of the flesh and the free exercise of personal liberty. 
The free and permanent renunciation of these is necessary, but 
also sufficient for acquiring Christian perfection. 11 The promises 
made in a Religious Institute insure permanency, for God de- 
mands the fulfillment of vows : "Si quid Deo vovisti, ne moreris 
reddere, displicet enim ei infidelis et stulta promissio." 12 And 
St. Thomas says: "Votum quandam obligationem importat 
. . . et voto quis Deo obligatur ex justitia eo modo, quo 
iustitia ad Deum esse potest." 13 Therefore the double obligation 
of justice and fidelity towards God binds one to adhere to such 
a promise of perseverance in Religion. 

We might ask why a greater stability is achieved through the 
vow than the oath. Authors dispute whether "per se" the vow 
or oath imposes the greater obligation. Both are acts of Re- 
ligion. The vow creates an obligation of fidelity, and the oath, 
that of reverence towards God. The one promises something 
to God, the other invokes His authority to confirm a promise to 
man. But when the vow and oath appertain to the Religious life, 
there is no doubt that the vow induces the greater stability, for 
it is the promise itself while the oath is only accessory. And 
then the Church has always laid greater stress upon the vow and 
a dispensation from it requires graver reasons. 14 

As a promise made to God, the vow is a purely internal act. 
But the natural law dictates that if it is to be adjudicated in the 
external forum, it must be made public ; and if it is to become 
the foundation of a state in life, it is very becoming that some 
solemnity be attached to it. 15 Thus vows have ever been divided 



11 Suarez, 1. c. ; Sebastianelli, 1. c. Vermeersch, De Rel. Inst, et Personis, 
Tom. I, c. 1, a. 11. 

12 Eccl. C. 6. 

13 "Summa," II. II., qu. 88, a. 1. 

"Suarez, de Jur. lib. II, 6, 12; Ojetti, o. c, n. 2547; Noldin, 1. c. 
15 St. Thomas, 1. c, qu. 88, a. 7. 



60 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

into private and public. But in regard to Religious life, vows 
have received the appellation of Solemn and Simple according 
to the special specification of the Church. Boniface VIII says : 
"Illud solum votum debere dici sollemne . . . quod solem- 
nizatum fuerit per susceptionem SS. Ordinis aut per professionem 
expressam vel tacitam factam alicui de religionibus per Sedem 
Apostolicam approbatam . . . Nos attendentes, quod voti 
sollemnitas ex sola institutione ecclesiae est inventa." 16 With 
the introduction of Religious Congregations the Simple vows be- 
came the foundation and bond of these Institutes. 17 The Society 
of Jesus prescribed both Solemn and Simple vows. 18 Pius IX 
prescribed that the Religious Orders of men make the Simple 
vows for three years after the Novitiate and then the Solemn. 1 ' 
Leo XIII extended the same to Orders of women. 20 

The obligation, however, of the Solemn and Simple vow is 
the same. Celestine III maintained that "votum simplex non 
minus obligat apud Deum quam sollemne." 21 And Fr. Ver- 
meersch says, "vota sollemnia et privata inter se differunt non 
tarn intrinseca quam accidentali et extrinseca accessione auctori- 
tatis." 22 But the Church has attached an additional power to 
the Solemn vow in the form of an invalidating impediment to 
the acts opposed to the Solemn vow. 23 Since this incapacitating 
effect of the Solemn vow emanates simply from the Church's 
authority, it follows that She can also affix it to the Simple vow. 
This has been done by Her for instance in the case of Simple 
vows made by the Scholastics in the Society of Jesus. 24 



16 C. Unic. de voto in 6°. 



Const. ''Inter cetera," Jan. 20, 1521; "Quamvis justa," June 28, 1748; 
'Conditae a Christo," Dec. 8, 1900. 

18 Const. "Ascendente Domino," 1584. 

19 Deer. S. C. EE. et RR., March 19, 1857. 
■* Deer. S. C. EE. et RR., May 3, 1902. 

22 C. 6, X. qui clerici. 

'" De rel. Instit. et Pers., Tom. I, c. I. 

23 Cfr. "Corpus Juris," 1. c. 

24 Const. "Ascendente Domino," cit. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 61 

In order that the Simple vows may form a permanent bond in 
Religious Congregations, it is necessary that they be perpetual. 
Many Institutes exact only temporary vows. Consequently, in 
these the true nature of the Religious state is sacrificed. This, 
however, in no wise affects the Religious life according to the 
evangelical counsels. Wherefore the Holy See has approved 
such Institutes and given them a place in her Common law. 

A still greater departure from the Religious state is made by 
those Institutes which have not the "three" substantial vows of 
Religion, but make only one or the other, be it temporary or 
perpetual. Leo XIII acknowledged these Institutes in the gen- 
eral "Charter" for Religious Congregations, but in the following 
year recommends the three substantial vows ; this is evidenced by 
the "Normae" which are destined to constitute the guiding prin- 
ciples for all Congregations. In Art. 102 we read, "Tria tantum 
substantialia (vota) excluso quarto, sint admittenda." The ex- 
ception to the fourth vow is evidently to preclude the multiplica- 
tion of obligations. Many Institutes, as for example the Jesuits, 
Friars Minor, Clerks Regular, Passionists, Nuns of St. Clare and 
others, make a fourth vow. The Council of Trent approved of 
this custom. 25 But for Congregations the Holy See has evidently 
found a fourth vow inexpedient. 

The vows of Religion entail severe obligations which generally 
bind for life. Wherefore the Church takes the greatest care that 
sufficient time and opportunity are afforded the candidates to con- 
sider well the responsibilities. The Council of Trent prescribes 
at least one year of probation for Regulars, 26 and the same law is 
generally extended to Congregations approved by Rome. The 
"Normae" (Art. 72) permit the time of probation to be pro- 
tracted to at least two years if deemed expedient. After this 
period of deliberation there can remain little room for ignorance 
or error in the mind of the Novice. Nevertheless should a sub- 



23 Sess. 25, c. I. 
"Sess. 25. 



62 RISUGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

stantial error in regard to the object of the vow exist, it would 
vitiate the same : "Vota quae ... in aliqua religione appro- 
bata emittuntur, irrita non esse, nisi intercesserit error substan- 
tialis." 27 So in like manner would the vows ordinarily be null 
and void if one were forced to make them. Billuart says, in 
speaking of the vow : "Votum sive simplex sive sollemne emissum 
ex metu gravi in juste ab homine incussu ad extorquendum illud, 
iure positivo est nullum." 28 

No general principles are adducible for interpreting the scope 
of the vows of the different Institutes. The rules, constitutions 
and customs of every Society are the natural guides, except of 
course in matters regarding the vow of chastity. Here no di- 
vergence of opinion or practice is possible. Sometimes the Holy 
See, or the Institute with the permission of the Holy See, insists 
upon a stricter observance of the vows. It is generally held that 
such innovations, if they are really contrary to the established 
practice, do not ordinarily bind the members who have been living 
under the old rules and customs, but affect only those who make 
their vows after these changes. 29 

While the rules and constitution interpret the scope of the 
vows, yet they themselves are not included in the obligations as- 
sumed by the vows, unless this should be clearly stated. Bouix 
says : "Regula non obligat vi voti oboedientiae, nisi id in ea clare 
exprimitur . . . et ideo propria obligatio regulae, ut sic, 
non ex voto oboedientiae, sed ex propria ratione legis et prin- 
cipiis ejus, est colligenda." 30 It was shown above that 
the rules ordinarily do not bind under sin. Must we then 
conclude, since neither the vow of obedience nor any precept 
make the rules of an Institute obligatory in conscience, they are 
only a counsel and, therefore, their observance or violation op- 



21 Ojetti, o. c, n. 4135 ; De Lugo, de Jure et Justitia, Disp. XXII, n. 88. 
*1. c., Dissert. IV, art. I, c. 18; cfr. Sebastianelli, vol. I, p. 385, for 
exceptions to this general law. 
29 Vermeersch, Periodica, vol. VII, p. (18). 
80 De Regularibus, vol. II, p. 546. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 63 

tional? Suarez thinks not: "Regula religiosa non est merum 
consilium ; quia praeter illam sunt multa alia quae ex consilio 
possunt religiosa . . . et nihilominus religiosus omittens alia 
consilia supra suam regulam, non censetur deesse suo muneri et 
statui : si autem suam regulam praetermittat, deficere censetur 
a sua obligatione. Ergo talis regula respectu illius plus est quam 
consilium. Ergo necessitatem aliquam imponit; potest, ergo, 
inf ractionem punire ; et injunctam poenam explere tenetur vio- 
lator etiam in conscientia. Unde etiam tunc rationem legis 
aliquatenus retinet regula." 31 

Summing up, then, we see that the vows of perpetual poverty, 
chastity and obedience constitute the natural bond of the Re- 
ligious state. Sometimes this bond is replaced by an oath or a 
mere promise which destroys the true notion of a permanent 
state, but which the Church has accepted as sufficient for a quasi- 
Religious life in well-organized Communities. In every case an 
obligation of justice is contracted which in two instances is in- 
creased by an obligation of religion. The extent of the obligation 
is measured by the rules of the Institute, which in turn have the 
sanction of at least penal laws. 



,l Suarez, De Relig., Tom. 4, Tract. 8, lib. I, c. 2 ; Bouix, 1. c, p. 545 sq. 



64 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 



CHAPTER VI. 



Egress From a Religious Institute. 



The bond of Religion differs essentially from that of Sacred 
Orders and Matrimony. In the present economy of Divine 
Providence, the bond of Sacred Orders and Matrimony is in- 
dissoluble, while that of Religion is "per se" perpetual, but for 
just and proportionately grave reasons may be dissolved and its 
obligation dispensed with or commuted. The present chapter, 
therefore, purposes to investigate the general obligation of per- 
severance, and the canonical regulations regarding dispensation 
and dismissal. 

Religious, properly and improperly so-called, are obliged to 
persevere in virtue of the mutual promise made in the Religious 
profession. This supposes some sort of a promise. If a Con- 
gregation were to allow egress at will, there could be no question 
of a strict obligation to persevere, unless ecclesiastical law in gen- 
eral or some external right of justice would be violated thereby. 
By the Religious profession the candidate surrenders himself to 
the Society which in turn accepts his promise and obliges itself 
to provide for all the necessaries of soul and body : "Intervenit 
proinde contractus utrinque onerosus, religiosum erga congrega- 
tionem obligans ; ita ut, abstrahendo etiam a votis, laedatur ius 
congregationi acquisitum, si religiosus, ipsa invita, earn derelin- 
quat. Quia hoc modo ligant ex natura sua contractus onerosi 
quilibet." 1 This doctrine applies equally, "quoad congregationes 
status religiosi essentiam non habentes, sed in quibus intervenit 
votum, juramentumve aut promissio perseverantiae." 2 We find 



1 Bouix, De Reg., vol. II, p. 162. 
* Bouix, 1. c, p. 464. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 65 



here a true application of the rule laid down in the Sacred Canons : 
"Mutare quis consilium non potest in alterius praejudicium." 

This, however, supposes that the promise or vows are valid 
and no higher duty intervenes. But what if the invalidity of the 
profession be invoked? According to the Council of Trent an 
ecclesiastical trial may be instituted contesting the validity of the 
Religious profession within five years from the day of the pro- 
fession. The nature and procedure of this judicial trial were 
clearly defined by Benedict XIV. 4 All this, however, refers only 
to Regulars. In diocesan Institutes the Bishop would in- 
vestigate and decide the case ''sola facti veritate inspecta." 5 
But in approved Congregations, if the nullity of the profes- 
sion were sought, the solution would remain with the Holy 
See, unless the constitutions of the said Congregation 
made special provision for such cases. Bastien says in 
this regard: "En tous cas, si un proces doit etre entame, 
faudrait recourir au Saint-Siege, s'il s'agit des congregations ap- 
prouvees par lui." 6 Wernz thinks, however, that if the nullity 
of the profession were desired by either the Religious or Institute, 
it would be more expedient to resort to dismissal and dispensa- 
tion of vows : "Utplurimum huiusmodi causae, quibus persona 
religiosa vel institutum religiosum praetendunt nullitatem sim- ' 
plicis professionis et postulant solutionem vinculi contracti cum 
instituto religioso et liberationem a votis, potius expediuntur per 
viam dismissionis et dispensationis saltern ad cautelam datae 
servatis legibus proprii instituti et decretis pontificiis." ' Such 
a dismissal according to the present discipline renders entrance 
into another institute very difficult, if not impossible. For this 
reason we prefer the solution of Bastien and deem it more ex- 



Regula Jur. 42 in 6. 

Sess. XXV, c. 19, De Regularibus; Const. "Si datam," Mar. 4, 1748. 

Deer. S. C. EE. et RR., June 1.2, 1858 ; Bargilliat, o. c., n. 1148. 

O. c, p. 98. 

O. c, vol. Ill, n. 673. 



66 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

pedient to refer the case to the Holy See, unless the constitutions 
offer an alternative. 

But there are instances in which even the valid profession can- 
not prevent one from leaving a Religious Congregation. In a 
previous chapter it was said that the duty of providing for one's 
nearest of kin takes precedence of the obligation in Religion. 
The same holds in cases of extreme necessity when egress from 
the Religious Congregation is the only means of providing ade- 
quately for the preservation of one's health or other similar duties. 
In such instances the Community is generally able and willing 
to come to the assistance of its members, even with extraordinary 
means ; but were it not, there would be no violation of any rights 
in leaving an Institute. 8 

Furthermore the Sacred Canons formerly permitted Religious 
in the strict sense to enter a stricter Order at will. 9 This, how- 
ever, is contrary to present practice: "Nunc in praxi," says Ojetti, 
"semper requiritur venia a Sancta Sede." 10 As to Religious 
Congregations, Bastien says : "il faut done ici s'en referer aux 
constitutions de l'institut et voir ce qu'elles exigent. D'apres 
la pratique en vigueur a la S. congregation des £v. et Reg., telle 
que la montrent les 'Normae' a 61, le recours au Saint-Siege est 
de rigueur." n 

Under ordinary circumstances, then, the general principles hold 
that egress from a Religious Congregation without the consent of 
the Institute or the dispensation of the Holy See is illicit. This 
is the common teaching of all Theologians and Canonists. Bouix 
says and demonstrates : "Quoties intervenit promissio persever- 
antiae a Congregatione acceptata, nisi congregatio ipsa consentiat, 
nemo praeter summum Pontificem potest ullum congregationis 
membrum liberum facere, sive a dicta promissione, sive a jura- 



s Bastien, o. c, n. 86 ; St. Thomas, II, II, qu. 189 ; St. Alphonsus, o. c, 
n. 67-70. 

9 C. 18, tit. 31, X. lib. III. 

* O. c, n. 3989 ; De Angelis in Tit. 31, lib. Ill of Decretals. 

n O. c. 196. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 67 

mento aut votis earn firmantibus." 12 This refers to diocesan as 
well as approved Institutes. 13 When the Const. "Conditae a 
Christo" says, "Episcopo alumnas sodalitatum dioecesanarum 
professas dimittendi potestas," it immediately adds, "cavendum 
tamen ne istiusmodi remissione ius alienum laedatur ; laedatur 
autem, si insciis moderatoribus id fiat iusteque dissentientibus." 14 
The powers of a Bishop, and, "a fortiori," of an inferior cleric, 
over vows, oaths and promises extends only "citra prae judicium 
tertii." The Sovereign Pontiff, however, is the supreme admin- 
istrator over all the possessions and rights of Religious Congre- 
gations, and, therefore, can dispense a Religious from his obliga- 
tion toward the Community, notwithstanding the dissent of its 
superiors. 

This, then, gives the key-note to the dispensing powers of the 
Bishops, priests and the various superiors in the respective Con- 
gregations. The Bishop, "ceteris paribus," can dispense from 
all vows (except that of perpetual chastity) in diocesan Insti- 
tutes. 15 When diocesan Institutes are spread throughout several 
dioceses, the Bishop of the motherhouse cannot reserve this right 
to himself in prejudice to the Bishops in whose diocese a branch 
of the Community resides and labors : "Dispensatio votorum pro 
monialibus domorum filialium in dioecesi existentium diversa ab 
ilia, in qua degit domus princeps, competit Ordinario domus 
filialis." 16 But the vows of approved Congregations are re- 
served to the Holy See. 17 One general exception, however, must 
be mentioned, viz., the vows of Religious who have performed 
military service: "Quod si ipsi iuvenes a votorum vinculo se re- 
laxari desiderent, aut sponte petant, facultas fit superioribus prae- 



12 O. c, vol. II, p. 466 ; St. Alph., o. c, lib. 3, Tract. 2, c. 4 ; Suarez, o. c, 
Tom. 2, Tract. 6, lib. 6, c. 15. 

13 Bouix, 1. c, p. 463. 

"Const. "Conditae a Christo," c. 1. a. 8. 

16 Ibid. 

"Responsio S. C. EE, et RR. April 21, 1903 (Anual. Eccl. 1903, p. 254). 

17 Const. "Conditae a Christo," C. II. a. 2. 



68 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

dictis (i. e., Superioribus generalibus) tamquam Apostolicae Sedis 
delegatis, vota solvendi, si agatur de Institutis clericalibus : si 
vero res sit de Institutis laicorum, vota soluta censeantur per 
litteras Superiorum quibtis licentia eis fit ad saeculum redeundi." 18 

Outside of this instance the Religious superior can ordinarily 
neither dispense from the vows nor grant permission to the Re- 
ligious to re-enter the world, for the obligation of the vow can 
be fulfilled only in the Congregation. It was said "ordinarily," 
for no cognizance is here taken of the powers conferred by par- 
ticular constitutions, nor of the right to dismiss a Religious for 
just reasons. This latter exception will be treated presently. 
Of course in Institutes whose members make no profession of 
vows, the question is quite different. Unless their constitutions 
reserve the right of permitting a Religious to leave the Society 
to the Holy See, the superior could confer the necessary permis- 
sion. In diocesan Institutes the regulations of the Ordinary 
must be consulted. 

But with the dispensation from vows or with the permission 
of superiors to leave the Institute neither unconditional liberty 
nor all previous rights are restored to the Religious. We have 
seen that the dispensation from vows constitutes an impediment 
to entering another Congregation or Order, unless a special per- 
mission of the Holy See is obtained. In addition to this the 
Council of Baltimore closes the door of the priesthood to teach- 
ing Brothers of the United States : "Neminem qui in hac Con- 
gregatione (Brothers of Christian Schools) prima vota emiserit, 
et deinde quacumque de causa congregationi valedixerit, in provin- 
ciarum nostrarum seminaria tamquam sacrorum ordinum candi- 
datum sine dispensatione S. Congregationis admitti posse. Idem 
statuunt (Patres huius Concilii) de Fratribus Xaverianis, Fran- 
ciscalibus aliisque quibus lege sua sacerdotium ambire vetitum 
est." 19 Furthermore Leo XIII forbids clerics who have re- 



Decr. S. C. de Rel., Jan. 1, 1911. 
Ill C. of Baltimore, n. 99. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 69 

ceived a dispensation from their vows to leave the Congregation 
before they have found a Bishop to receive them, and a canonical 
title to insure the means of support: "Ex claustro non exeant, 
donee Episcopum benevolum receptorem invenerint et de eccle- 
siastico patrimonio sibi providerint, secus suspensi maneant ab 
exercito susceptorum ordinum. Quod porrigitur quoque ad 
alumnos votorum simplicium temporalium, qui quovis professionis 
vinculo iam fuerint soluti, ob elapsum tempus, quo vota ab ipsis 
fuerunt nuncupata." 20 This regulation seems to affect directly 
only clerics of approved Congregations of Simple vows : "Qui 
in Sacris Ordinibus constituti et votis simplicibus obstricti." The 
Holy See, however, is wont to extend the Deer. "Auctis ad- 
modum" to other Communities of clerics. When, therefore, ap- 
proved or diocesan Societies have received from the Holy See a 
privileged title of ordination, their obligations or laws in regard 
to dismissing clerics must be sought in the special indult rather 
than in the Common law. 

To discourage clerics still more from deserting the Religious 
life, Pius X has barred their way to any secular benefice, office 
of dignity or responsibility within the diocese; viz., from any 
office or benefice, especially in Basilica and Cathedral Churches, 
from any teaching or administrative office in ecclesiastical sem- 
inaries, and also in universities which enjoy the Apostolic faculty 
of conferring degrees, from any office in the Episcopal Curia, 
and finally from the office of visitator or moderator of any Re- 
ligious Society. And that their example may not influence or 
scandalize their quondam co-religious, they may not fix their 
domicile in places where the deserted Community conducts Con- 
vents or houses. 21 These prohibitions extend primarily to Re- 
ligious Orders and Congregations of perpetual vows, but now 
also to all other Institutes, "Si Religiosi votis tempo raneis, vel 
iuramento perseverantiae vel supradictis promissionibus per sex 



Deer. "Auctis admodum," Nov. 4, 1892. 

Deer. S. C. de Rel., "Cum minoris," June 15, 1909. 



70 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

integros annos ligati fuerunt." 22 Diocesan Institutes are not 
included in this declaration of the Sacred Congregation. They 
are absolutely and exclusively under the Bishop's jurisdiction 
except when the contrary is expressly stated and therefore he 
could promote ex-members to the respective positions. The 
fact that the Deer. "Cum minoris" refers only to voluntary egress, 
does not place a premium on expulsion and dismissal as would 
seem at first sight. Severer laws affect such. 23 

Like the individual, every society possesses the right of self- 
defense and self-preservation. Therefore it may repel and punish 
an unjust aggressor. If then a Religious commits crimes which 
are grievously detrimental to the moral or material welfare of 
the Institute, the Congregation must have the right not only to 
punish the criminal, but also to expel him, if no other means has 
served to effect amendment. In the case of diocesan Institutes, 
this right, by positive legislation, is vested in the Ordinary: 
"Episcopo alumnas sodalitatum dioecesanarum professas dimit- 
tendi potestas est." 24 No explicit reference is made to Insti- 
tutes of men nor to Societies which have no vows. But evidently 
as long as an Institute is diocesan, the Bishop is the natural 
superior, and therefore also the competent judge to inflict neces- 
sary punishment on delinquents. With the approval of a Con- 
gregation, however, this right devolves upon the Religious su- 
perior: "Praesidum est . . . tirones ac professos dimittere, 
iis tamen servatis quaecumque ex instituti legibus pontificiisque 
decretis servari oportet." 25 The sentence of dismissal in Insti- 
tutes of women becomes effective only on the confirmation of the 
Holy See. 26 Furthermore the Holy See does not wish that the 



22 Declaratio et Extensio decreti "Cum Minoris," April 5, 1910. 

23 Vermeersch, Periodica, vol. V, pp. 41 sq. and 126 ; Capello, o. c, p. 212, 
575. 

24 Const. "Conditae a Christo," c. 1. a. 8. 
Ibidem, c. 2, a. 1. 
Deer. S. C. EE, et RR. Aug. 24, 1887 ; May 22, 1895 ; Bastien, o. c., p. 

124; Wernz, o. c., vol. Ill, p. 379. 



36 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 71 

superior be the sole judge in cases of dismissal. Wherefore the 
"Normae" of 1901 (Art. 201) prescribe that the board of con- 
suitors shall have a voice in deciding matters of such importance. 
While these "Normae" are not "per se" preceptive, yet they 
express the mind of the Holy See and constitute at least a directive 
norm for all Religious Institutes which have not an explicit norm 
laid down in their constitutions. The constitutions of each 
Society, therefore, form the law for each Community. 

But neither the Bishops nor Religious superiors may act arbi- 
trarily in actions of dismissal. They are bound in justice and by pre- 
cept not to expel a member except for a just and proportionately 
grave cause. 27 In Institutes which have not the true Religious 
state, i. e., the three perpetual vows, the reason justifying dismis- 
sal need not be so grave, but must always be a just cause: "Si 
interveniat votum, vel iuramentum, vel promissio perseverandi in 
congregatione et congregatio acceptet, ejectio sine justa causa 
fieri non potest." 28 Ordinarily the constitutions designate the 
causes which entail dismissal. Extraordinary cases must be left 
to the prudent judgment of the superior. 

For Congregations of perpetual vows and those of clerics with 
temporary vows, a reform in the judicial procedure of expulsion 
and dismissal has been made. 29 We say "expulsion" and "dis- 
missal," for the terms are often used promiscuously, 30 but in the 
present decree, "Cum singulae," the former signifies ejection from 
a strict Order, while the latter is restricted to Congregations of 
Simple vows. 31 

According to the tenor of the new decree one may be dismissed 
(or expelled, respectively) "ipso facto" by committing certain 



" Const. "Emanavit," Jan. 21, 1758 ; Deer. S. C. EE, et RR. Nov. 4, 1892 ; 
et Jan. 10, 1896 ; et July 4, 1898 ; Wernz, 1. c. ; Bastien, o. c., p. 119 ; Bouix, 
o. c., vol. II, p. 486 and sq. 

28 Bouix, 1. c., p. 489. 

2 *Decr. S. C. de Rel., "Cum singulae," May 16, 1911. 

80 Wernz, o. c., vol. Ill, n. 676 in note. 

11 Vermeersch, Periodica, vol. VI, p. 47 sq. 



72 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

crimes or by the condemnatory sentence of a legitimately con- 
stituted tribunal. The offenses entailing "ipso jure" dismissal 
are: apostasy from Faith, apostasy from the Institute (effective 
only after three months), elopement, and finally marriage or at- 
tempt at marriage. But even in these offenses a declaratory 
sentence is required by the law. In other crimes gravity of mat- 
ter and malice of will must be demonstrated by a judicial process 
before ejection from the Institute can be inflicted. The gravity 
of matter must be adjudged according to the importance of the 
law and the penalty sanctioning it together with the amount of 
actual injury, whether moral or material, inflicted on the Com- 
munity. 

The court which sits in judgment, must consist of the superior 
general and a board of four members. In case some Congrega- 
tion's organization does not provide an advisory board for the 
general direction, each case must be referred to the Holy See. 
The decision of this court is definitive, yet appeal to the Holy 
See, according to the regular Canons, is always admissible, i. e., 
ten days under ordinary circumstances are allotted to have re- 
course to the Roman Congregations for Religious. 

That the rights of the Institute and the accused be adequately 
defended, a "promoter justitiae" and a "defensor rei" must be 
appointed. The former is designated by the Congregation, while 
the accused may choose his own advocate; but should he fail to 
do so, it devolves upon the Institute to assign one. 

The mode of procedure begins with the local superior-provin- 
cial, or quasi-provincial. Three admonitions and corrections 
must have proven futile, before a preliminary trial is instituted. 
In this trial the offense — or better offenses, for three specifically 
different crimes or their equivalents must be imputable — and 
malice must be demonstrated. The means of demonstration are 
the ordinary ones of Canon Law, viz., voluntary confession, two 
reliable and sworn witnesses, documents and other available aids. 

After the charges have been duly authenticated and proven, the 
acts of the preliminary process are communicated to the general 
direction which will prepare the case and notify the accused to 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 73 

prepare a defense on the charges of the "promotor justitiae." 
On the day designated the cause will be adjudicated and decided 
according to the merits of the proof, after both the "promotor 
justitiae" and "defensor rei" have been given ample time and 
opportunity to defend their causes. 

Evidently the Religious cannot be ostracized from the Society 
before a decision has been handed down. In extraordinary cases, 
however, which do not suffer delay on account of imminent 
scandal or grave loss to the Institute, the provincial may proceed 
single-handed in applying measures which will ward off the 
threatened evil and only subsequently submit the case to the 
ordinary judicial process. 

The effects accompanying judicial dismissal consist in perpetual 
suspension for clerics and the prohibition to receive any other 
Orders without the permission of the Holy See. All the dis- 
missed and expelled members are not only prohibited from affiliat- 
ing themselves to another Community, but are rendered incapable 
of making a valid profession, and consequently of participating 
in the spiritual favors of any Religious Community approved by 
the Holy See. Apparently the censures inflicted by Common 
law upon the Regulars for the commission of the above crimes 
which entail "ipso jure" dismissal, are not by the new law ex- 
tended to Religious Congregations. The decree mentions spe- 
cifically only the suspension and impediment to enter another In- 
stitute, 32 and therefore neither abrogates nor extends the censures 
of Common law. 

In case those dismissed are clerics, the "Ordinarius originis et 
Ordinarius loci" of the suspended clerics must be notified. The 
Bishop, however, cannot by his ordinary power dispense from 
the censure, but recourse to the Holy See is necessary. 33 

These new regulations do not appertain to Institutes of laics 
with "temporary vows," nor to Institutes in which an oath or a 



;:2 Cfr. Wernz, o. c, vol. VI, p. 284 sq. ; Vermeersch, Periodica, vol. VI, 
p. 47 sq. 

33 Wernz, o. c, vol. VI, p. 221 ; Vermeersch, o. c, vol. VI, p. 50. 



74 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

mere promise of perseverance is made. These are still governed by 
the general princples stated above or by their special constitutions 
approved by the Holy See. The Deer. "Cum singulae" evidently 
places Institutes of laics with perpetual vows on the same basis 
with Institutes of clerics in regard to dismissing members — one 
of the very rare instances in Canon law in which the power of 
true jurisdiction is conferred upon laics. 34 

For Institutes of Sisters with perpetual Simple vows the laws 
governing dismissal have received some modification by the same 
decree, but are not identified with those of Institutes of men. 
The four offenses entailing "ipso jure" dismissal are not extended 
to Nuns and Sisters. Certainly these crimes together with any 
grave, external, and public offenses which have rendered the 
person incorrigible, warrant dismissal, but the local Ordinary 
must verify the malice and gravity of the crime and the Holy 
See must confirm the sentence, before a Nun or Sister in perpetual 
vows may be ejected from the Institute. Only in cases of im- 
mediate danger of grave scandal or loss to the Community may 
the Ordinary supply the Holy See's confirmation. But, subse- 
quently, the entire case must still be presented to the S. Congrega- 
tion for Religious. 

The power of dismissal in Institutes of women is naturally 
vested in the superior and presumably in the superior general, 
although the law makes no special distinction. As in Institutes 
of men, the advisory board of the Congregation has a definitive 
voice which must be expressed by a secret ballot, before ejection 
from the Institute becomes legal. 

Legitimate dismissal does not in itself dispense from the vows. 
The Const. "Conditae a Christo" reserves the vows of approved 
Institutes to the Holy See. But one may safely presume that the 
Holy See will grant the necessary dispensation in conjunction with 
the confirmation of the sentence of dismissal. If not, the Re- 
ligious would owe obedience to the Ordinary. 



Vermeersch, 1. c. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 75 

These same regulations extend likewise to Nuns with Solemn 
vows, but not to Sisters with only "temporary" Simple vows. 
The latter are still governed by the old discipline explained above 
which, after all, differs little from the new. The same, a fortiori, 
must be said of Institutes without vows and all diocesan Insti- 
tutes whether they make perpetual or temporary vows. 

The entire affair of both voluntary and compulsory surrender 
of the Religious life is of such supreme importance for the indi- 
vidual that ordinarily it should be considered only as a last resort 
and as the only means to avoid a greater evil. The Church 
realizes this more clearly than any Theologian or Canonist has 
ever been able to point out. Wherefore She safeguards the 
Religious life with the greatest supervision and strives to remove, 
or at least render remote, every danger that threatens it from the 
world without. She destroys the hopes and allurements of 
ecclesiastical rights, privileges, and honors which too often blind 
the intellect and weaken the will in their native prerogatives of 
rectitude and stability. She, moreover, circumscribes the au- 
thority of superiors that it may not be exercised unto destruction, 
but edification of souls destined to Life Everlasting. Thus in 
all things She shows Herself the kind Mother in bearing with 
the weaknesses of Her children, and the mighty defender of 
justice, right, and authority. 



76 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 



CHAPTER VII. 



The Relation of Congregations to the Holy See. 



The supreme authority over the Religious life and Religious 
Institutes is vested by divine commission in the Roman Pontiff. 
To him is entrusted the direction of the faithful not only in the 
way of precepts, but also in the path of counsels. He can, there- 
fore, prescribe by general and particular laws whatever is neces- 
sary or useful for the conservation and development of the 
Religious life. But since the Religious life is only of counsel and 
obligatory only in virtue of and according to the terms of the 
contract, the papal authority is limited to the obligation assumed 
by the Religious profession : "Le pouvoir du Soverain Pontife 
est done limite par les termes memes du contrat de profession 
qui varie selon les instituts ; mais ce pouvoir peut s'exercer sur 
tout ce que le religieux a promis, sur tout ce qui est necessaire 
pour le maintien de la discipline et le lien de l'etat religieux, sur 
tout ce qui a rapport a la nature ou a la fin particuliere d'un 
institut." 1 

The Institutes themselves, on the other hand, are purely ec- 
clesiastical corporations, and for that very reason the inalienable 
right of supreme administrative power resides in the Roman 
Pontiff. Hence his absolute control over them is limited only 
by natural justice and equity. The Pope, therefore, may not only 
impose new obligations on an Institute, but may also alter or dis- 
solve a Community. 

In our rapid historical survey of Religious Congregations 
above, we have seen that the number of such Institutes is legion. 



: Bastien. o. c, p. 172. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 77 

There can be no question, then, that the Roman Pontiff would as- 
sume personal and immediate direction and government of them. 
It is well known that the Church has varied Her mode of gov- 
ernment throughout the ages according to Her development and 
the constantly changing conditions of society. Hence we nat- 
urally expect to find that the Holy See has also exercised her 
supervision and authority over Religious Institutes in diverse ways 
at different times. 

For many centuries the Holy See appointed Cardinal Protectors 
for each Institute and bestowed on them full jurisdiction in all 
matters concerning the individual Religious as also the Institute. 
Thus the Rule of St. Francis of Assisi prescribes : "Per oboedi- 
entiam ad haec injungo ministris, ut petant a Domino Papa 
unum de sanctae Ecclesiae Cardinalibus qui sit gubernator, pro- 
tector et corrector istius fraternitatis." Manifestly this includes 
true jurisdiction and even a superior jurisdiction to that of the 
Order's prelates. So also do the words of Sixtus IV confer a 
real power of jurisdiction on the Cardinal Protector of the Car- 
melites : "In quibuscumque causis per eos (nempe Carmelitas) 
movendis quacumque ratione vel causa quae excogitari posset, eis 
ministrent justitiae complementum." 2 Other Orders made simi- 
lar provisions. 

Gradually, however, the Holy See diminished the powers of 
the Cardinal Protector until his office has become, according to 
Common law, a mere honorary one. 3 The Const, of Innocent 
XII "Christi fidelium" (Feb. 17, 1694), deprived him of all 
jurisdiction and administrative power and left him only the empty 
honor of some formalities when visiting the Community and of 
having his coat of arms over the portals of the Institute. But 
the office of mediation between the Society and the Holy See 
constitutes today the chief prerogative of the Cardinal Protector. 
Ordinarily an Order or Congregation seeks favors or justice 



Cfr. Pellizario, Manuale reg., Tract. 8, c. 8, n. 161. 
Bouix, o. c, vol. II, p. 167 et sq. 



78 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

from the Holy See through the Cardinal Protector. Still even 
this is frequently unnecessary on account of the superior general 
residing near the Roman Curia. So in turn the Holy See gen- 
erally entrusts to the Cardinal Protector the execution of all 
rescripts: "Cardinalibus Protectoribus Ordinum committuntur 
rescripta, quae universum Ordinem respiciunt: alia vero eis re- 
mitti vetitum est." 4 Furthermore in regard to the members of 
the Community Bouix aptly remarks : "Ex eo vero quod Cardinalis 
Protector jurisdictionaliter religiosorum causis et negotiis sese 
ingerere nequeat, non sequitur non posse eum in iis sese im- 
miscere quatenus protector, id est, adjutor, amicus et advocatus. 
Immo hoc ipsius officium est, praesertim ubi tutandi sunt religiosi 
ab injuriis et oppressionibus. Agit autem ut protector qui re- 
quisitus juvamen praestat. Quod si Cardinalis Protector, non 
requirentibus aut invitis religionis praelatis, dirimenda negotia 
sibi arroget, eas inducit perturbationes, quas fcublat&s voluit 

Innocentius XII." 

If, therefore, today the Cardinal Protector — for the practice 
of the Holy See to appoint Cardinal Protectors for Religious 
Institutes still obtains — possesses any jurisdiction over Religious 
Institutes, he derives it not from Common law, but from a special 
grant of the Holy See, or from the constitutions of the respective 
Institute. 5 Frequently the Holy See is wont to bestow special 
faculties on the Cardinal Protector of Communities of women. 
We have a very recent incidence of this. Pius X conferred actual 
governing powers upon the Cardinal Protector of the Order of 
St. Clare : "Ad Proto-monasterii gubernationem quod attinet, 
decernimus ut posthac habeatur tanquam Vicarius natus Cardi- 
nalis Protectoris vel Legati, Minister provincialis seraphicae 
provinciae a Santa Clara, incolumi Ministri generalis iure." 6 
The Holy Father is here conferring actual jurisdiction, or rather 



4 Bizzari, Collectanea, p. 613. 

5 Bouix, 1. c. ; Wernz, o. c, vol. Ill, n. 698 ; Vermeersch, de Rel. Inst., vol. 
I, p. 397. 

"Brief, "Quamquam," Aug. 9, 1912. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 79 

he is confirming the exemption given by Leo XIII to the Mon- 
astery of St. Clare : "Assissiense monasterium S. Clarae a quavis 
jurisdiction eximimus . . . perpetuum in modum Nostrae 
ac successorum Nostrorum immediate jurisdictioni subiicimus. 
Huiusmodi autem jurisdictionem venerabili fratri Nostro . . . 
uti apud S. Sedem Protectori universae Fratrum Minorum S. 
Francisci de Observantia familiae. Eiusque hoc in munere Car- 
dinalibus successoribus, perpetuis futuris temporibus, delegamus." 
But this is exceptional in modern Roman procedure. 

From the sixteenth century on, the Holy See has been govern- 
ing the Religious Institutes through the Roman Congregations. 
In 1586 Sixtus V reorganized the Roman Curia and created the 
Congregation for the affairs of Religious: "Congregatio Epis- 
copomm et Aliorum Praelatorum," and confirmed the "Congrega- 
tio super consultationibus Regularium." 7 The two Congrega- 
tions frequently overlapped each other in their competency, 
wherefore the "Congregatio super consultationibus Regularium" 
was united with the one of Bishops and Regulars in 1601. 

Innocent X instituted another Congregation exclusively for 
the reform of Religious Orders in Italy, and called it "Congre- 
gatio super statu Regularium." 8 Naturally its work was short- 
lived and its competency very limited. This induced Innocent 
XII to create the "Congregatio super disciplina regulari," and to 
confer upon it not only all the authority of the former Congre- 
gation, but also to bestow on it a certain authority over all the 
Religious Orders and Congregations within the Church. Ap- 
parently the authority of the new Congregation included no true 
jurisdiction, but rather an inquisitorial and consultative faculty 
which made the new Congregation a sort of commission to sug- 
gest reforms of the Religious life to the Holy See. 

Instead of endowing this Congregation with the necessary jur- 
isdiction to conduct the daily increasing affairs of Religious in 



7 Const. "Immensa aeterni," Jan. 22, 1587 ; "Romanus Pontifex," May 17, 
1586. 

8 Const. "Instaurandae," Oct., 1652; "Injuncti," April 11, 1668. 



80 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

the nineteenth century, Pius IX formed another Congregation: 
"Congregatio super statu Regularium Ordinum." 9 This third 
division in the government of Religious Institutes resulted in still 
greater confusion. The competency of each was not clearly 
defined, nor their obligations determined. 

To this state of affairs were added still more difficulties : First, 
by the fact that the "Congregatio Concilii" interpreted the laws 
of the Council of Trent; then, the "Congregatio de Prop. Fide" 
supplied the other Congregations in mission territories and in 
the Oriental Church ; and, finally, the "Congregatio pro negotiis 
ecclesiasticis extraordinariis" attended to all the affairs for the 
Religious in Russia and South America. Little wonder then that 
such a practical Pontiff as Pius X saw the necessity of reform 
in the methods of conducting the administration of Religious. 

By the Const. "S. Congregationi" (May 26, 1906) Pius X 
abolished the two above-mentioned Congregations of Innocent 
XII and Pius IX, and transferred all matters concerning Religious 
to the one Congregation of Bishops and Regulars. But with the 
reform of the entire Roman Curia in 1908, this Congregation 
disappeared, and the part of its competency appertaining to Re- 
ligious became vested in the new "Congregatio de Sodalibus Re- 
ligiosis" : "Ipsius enim est moderari, pro recta disciplina, quidquid 
Religiosos utriusque sexus attingit." 10 In the following words the 
territorial jurisdiction of this Congregation is outlined still more 
explictly: "Haec S. Congregatio iudicium sibi vindicat de iis 
tantum, quae ad Sodales religiosos utriusque sexus turn solem- 
nibus, turn simplicibus votis adstrictos, et ad eos qui, quamvis sine 
votis, in communi tamen vitam agunt more Religiosorum, itemque 
ad Tertios Ordines saeculares, in universum pertinent, sive res 
agatur inter religiosos ipsos, sive habita eorum ratione cum aliis." n 

The personnel of this Congregation consists of a Cardinal pre- 



• Const. "Ubi primum," June 17, 1847. 

10 Const. "Sapienti consilio," June 29, 1908. 

11 Ibidem, Pars I, Art. 5, n. I. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 81 

feet, secretary, sub-secretary, associate Cardinals, consultors and 
some minor officials. In 1915 eighteen Cardinals, twenty-nine 
consultors and thirteen minor officials were enumerated as con- 
stituting the entire Congregation. 1 - To facilitate the handling 
of the great amount of work that devolves upon this Congregation, 
it has been divided into three divisions. Distinct Commissions, 
therefore, regulate the affairs of Religious Orders, of Religious 
Congregations for men, and of Religious Congregations for 
women. Finally a special Commission for the approving of 
all New Institutes and their Constitutions, as Avas mentioned in 
Chapter V, has been appointed recently. The first three Com- 
mittees, or "Congresses," purpose to prepare the respective mat- 
ter for deliberation in the entire Congregation, to carry out the 
result of these deliberations according to required formalities, 
and, in minor affairs, to decide controversies and grant favors 
on their own authority. 13 

Not a universal jurisdiction, however, has been entrusted to 
this Congregation. Its competency is defined in the terms : "Est 
autem tribunal competens in omnibus causis, quae ratione disci- 
plinae, seu, ut dici, solet, in linea disciplinari aguntur, religioso 
sodali sive convento sive actore ; ceterae ad Sacr. Rom. Rotam 
erunt deferendae spectantes." 14 As to questions affecting Re- 
ligious and Bishops, the Congregation for Religious "ea omnia sibi 
moderanda assumit, quae sive inter Episcopos et religiosos 
utriusque sexus sodales intercedunt, sive inter ipsos religiosos." 15 
Hence all administrative and discipline matters are subject to the 
Congregation for Religious, but judicial affairs to the Sacred 
Rota. 

In the new papal Constitution and its accompanying "Normae 
communes" and "Normae peculiares," no clearly defined dis- 



12 "Annuario Pontificio," 1915. 

13 "Normae peculiares," June 29, 1908. 

14 Const. "Sapienti consilio," Pars. I, a. 5, n. 2. 

15 Ibidem. 



82 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

tinction between disciplinary and judicial procedure is made. 1 * 
Ojetti thinks that all disputes between a member and his Com- 
munity are to be decided "in via disciplinaria" ; while contro- 
versies arising between different Institutes or between Institutes 
and Bishops must be treated "per modum iudicii," and therefore 
by the Sacred Rota. 37 The latter supposition has been verified 
in a case in 1909. 1S But by the Deer. "Cum singulae" (May 16, 
1911), the "Congregation for Religious" has also received a true 
judicial jurisdiction, in as far as it has been constituted the com- 
petent tribunal for receiving and deciding the appeals in all 
cases of expulsion and dismissal of Religious. Then by a late 
decision the S. Consistorial Congregation determined that not the 
Congregation for Relgious, but the "Congregatio Concilii" pos- 
sesses the competency of awarding secular parishes to Religious. 19 
Finally a certain jurisdiction over Religious is proper to the new 
"Congregatio de Seminariis et de Studiorum Universitatibus" ; in 
those cases, viz., where Religious conduct Seminaries or Univer- 
sities. In all matters appertaining to these institutes of learning 
the new Congregation oversees and directs, "etiamsi regantur a 
religiosis Sodalibus." 20 

Reference has already been made to the limitation placed upon 
the jurisdiction of the Congregation for Religious in mission 
territories. We merely repeat them : "Quod vero spectat ad 
Sodales religiosos, eadem Congregatio (i. e., Congr. de Prop. 
Fide) sibi vindicat quidquid Religiosos qua Missionaries, sive ut 
singulos, sive simul sumptos tangit." 21 

The principal method employed by the Holy See to insure 
prudent administration and legislation for Religious Institutes 
by the Sacred Congregation, is the triennial report from each 



16 Ojetti, "De Romano Curia," p. 100 et sq. 

17 Ibidem, p. 106. 

M S. Rota, Decis., in Pharen. Iurium et Poenorum," July 29, 1909. 

M Deer. S. C. C, July 5, 1915. 

" "Motu proprio," Nov. 5, 1915. 

11 Const. "Sapienti consilio," part I, art. 6, n. 5. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 83 

Institute. Formerly the Holy See was accustomed to insist on 
this in the particular indults of approval, but since 1906 it has 
become an obligation of Common law. The details of this report 
have been completely outlined and prescribed in ninety-eight 
questions : "Modus et ratio conficiendi relationem omnibus et 
singulis, ad quos spectat, communi lege praescribatur." 22 This 
account together with the detailed report of Ordinaries exacted 
upon their "ad limina" visit, ordinarily affords the basis for Pon- 
tifical direction of and legislation for Religious Institutes. 

Sometime, however, it may happen that the Roman ordinances 
are not brought to the knowledge of some Religious Institutes, 
or they may be disregarded at times. Wherefore the Ordinaries 
are made responsible for the due promulgation and observance 
of Roman decrees for Religious: "Haec igitur S. Congregatio 
Negotiis Religiosorum Sodalium praeposita, summopere com- 
mendat Reverendissimis locorum Ordinariis eorumqe delegatis seu 
deputatis ad Monasteria, praesertim Monialium, quae domum sui 
iuris constituunt, nee generalem Superiorissam habent, ut noti- 
tiam decretorum, etiam in posterum edendorum, quae vitam re- 
ligiosam respiciunt, efficaciter evulgent inter Religiosas Familias 
et Instituta quoque dioecesana, ad abusus, si qui irrepserint, tol- 
lendos ad bonum largius diffundendum et uniformitatem in rerum 
canonicarum observantia ubique obtinendam." 23 The mind of 
the Holy See, therefore, is that even diocesan Institutes be di- 
rected by the regulations for approved Institutes, not indeed in 
the sense that they always constitute strict laws for diocesan 
Congregations, but that the Ordinaries at least endeavor to con- 
form diocesan Institutes as much as possible to the government 
of approved Communities. But above all, the Holy See insists 
that the Ordinaries supervise the reception and observance of 
pontifical laws by approved Institutes although they be exempted. 

What has here been said of general laws and prescriptions, 
holds also to a great extent for rescripts. In many instances 



22 Deer. S. C. de Rel., July 16, 1906. 

23 Deer. S. C. de Rel., July 3, 1910. 



84 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

the Holy See is want to transmit and execute also its particular 
orders through the Bishop: "S. C. solet in Executores deputare 
Episcopos, et Ordinarios Nullius etiam in rescriptis pro Regu- 
laribus, si agatur de clausura, de alienationibus, de saeculariza- 
tionibus religiosorum, de erectione novorum conventuum ac In- 
stitutorum et quoad Moniales in omnibus rescriptis. Si vero 
agatur de negotiis, executionem committere Superioribus regu- 
laribus, nempe vel Generali, vel provinciali vel abbati monasterii 
prout rei adiuncta exigunt." 24 If this is the practice of the Holy 
See in regard to Regulars, we can safely suppose that the same 
custom prevails in favor of Congregations. 

In the following pages it will appear more in detail that the 
Ordinaries possess a far greater authority over Religious Con- 
gregations than merely that of promulgating and executing Roman 
decrees. For Regular Orders this suffices, because they are 
entirely exempted from the Ordinary's jurisdiction and are placed 
directly under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Holy See. This 
is not the case in Congregations. The Holy See, indeed, assumes 
the direct and immediate government of approved Institutes 
in the manner explained, but at the same time it preserves as 
much of the ordinary Episcopal authority as is compatible with 
the nature of these Communities. But this will be developed in 
the subsequent chapter. 



Bizzarri, Collectanea, p. 613. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 85 



CHAPTER VIII. 



The Relation of Congregations to the Ordinary. 



A threefold standard must be considered in determining the 
relation of Religious Institutes to the local Ordinary. By "Ordi- 
nary" in the present chapter is understood the Bishop, Abbas 
Nullius, Vicar Apostolic and Prefect Apostolic; for the relation 
of each to Religious Congregations within their jurisdiction, 
"ceteris paribus," is identical. 1 The triple standard arises from 
the canonical status of an Institute as diocesan, inter-diocesan, 
or as an approved Congregation. 

The general laws regarding the Ordinary's jurisdiction over 
the respective Communities within his diocese are clearly laid 
down in Canon law. As to diocesan Institutes, the Const. "Con- 
ditae a Christo" states : "Eae una inductae sunt atque vigent 
Antistitum sacrorum auctoritate." No less clear is the decree 
"Dei providentis" in regard to inter-diocesan Congregations: 
"Instituta sodalitas, quamvis decursu temporis in plures dioecesas 
diffusa, usque tamen, dum pontificiae approbationis aut laudis 
testimonio caruerit, Ordinariorum jurisdictioni subjaceat." 
With pontifical approval, however, an Institute is placed "sub 
regimine Moderatoris generalis, salva Ordinariorum jurisdictione 
ad formam S. Canonum et Apostolicarum Constitutionum." 3 
The limitations this approval puts on the powers of the Ordinaries 
must be collected "ex ipsa decernendi ratione Sedi Apostolicae 
consueta in eiusmodi consociationibus approbandis." * Hence 
the general principle as to all Religious Congregations is this: 



1 Vermeersch, Periodica, vol. VII, pp. 20-43. 

2 Deer, c., n. 5 ; III C. Baltimore, n. 93. 

s Const. "Conditae a Christo," in the introduction. 
* Ibidem. 



86 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

The Ordinary possesses full jurisdiction over them in both the in- 
ternal and external forum except in those matters expressly ex- 
empted by the Holy See. 

No one doubts that the Ordinary may confer jurisdiction on 
clerics of Religious Institutes, for, ''potest quis per alium, quod 
potest facere per seipsum." 5 We say "clerics," because the 
Sacred Canons prescribe, "ut laici ecclesiastica negotia tractare 
non praesumant." 6 But the Ordinary possesses no powers con- 
trary to the Common law. 

The same jurisdiction, however, may also be conferred by 
custom. This is an accepted principle of ecclesiastical law. 
Authors dispute as to the length of time required for a legiti- 
mate custom to confer jurisdiction, but it is a probable opinion 
that ten years suffice. 7 Hence some Religious Societies may 
readily have acquired a certain exemption from episcopal juris- 
diction in virtue of custom. 

This power of Ordinaries and custom is invoked especially 
when determining Religious Communities' exemption from 
parochial obligations. Some authors are reluctant to restrict the 
pastor's ordinary rights, but Wernz says : "Non solum indulto 
apostolico et legitima consuetudine, sed etiam statuto Episcopo 
fieri potest, ut communitas quaedam religiosa vel conservatorium 
vel convictus vel similia instituta, licet intra parochiam maneant, 
a cura ordinaria parochi eximantur et proprio capellano subii- 
ciantur." 8 Canonists in general hold that Religious Congrega- 
tions are exempt by custom from the jurisdiction of the pastor 
in whose parish they are situated. 9 

The Holy See, however, may certainly exempt Institutes from 
the jurisdiction of both Bishop and pastor and confer on them 
all the necessary powers for an independent government. As to 



8 Regula Juris, 68 in 6°. 

'Cap. 2, De judicibus, X, lib. II. 
7 Vermeersch, o. c, vol. VII, p. (28). 
8 0. c, vol. II, n. 828. 

9 Bastien, o. c, n. 353 and 406 ; Bouix, De Reg., vol. II, p. 349. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 87 

Institutes of clerics no difficulty presents itself. But Institutes 
of laics may also receive a limited jurisdiction from the Holy 
See, notwithstanding the general Canons to the contrary. In 
fact, as we saw in the sixth chapter, this is verified in the case of 
judicial expulsion and dismissal. Some apparent difficulties, 
however, arise in Institutes of women. Bargilliat says : "Neque 
femina capax est jurisdictionis, saltern de jure ecclesiastico." 10 
And St. Thomas declares: "Feminam non posse habere aliquam 
jurisdictionem spiritualem." n But Benedict XIV, when out- 
lining the status of the Anglican Sisters, draws attention to the 
fact that "nee agitur de tali superiorissa generali, quae amplam 
quandam jurisdictionem in subditas exercere, ipsaque ab ordinaria 
Episcopi auctoritate exempta esse debeat." 12 The Pope, there- 
fore, supposes that jurisdiction is vested in some feminine su- 
periors. Hence Bouix's conclusion on this point in regard to 
Abbesses may also be applied to superiors of Congregations : 
"Si quando abbattissa aliqua jurisdictionem habuerit, id non juri 
communi tribuendum est, sed pontificio privilegio." 13 

The powers of Ordinaries may be restricted even over diocesan 
Congregations. Vermeersch thinks that the pontifical laws of 
alienation of ecclesiastical property, prohibit the Bishop from 
dissolving a diocesan Institute : "Gravem tantum ob causam potest 
extinguere Institutum vel tollere domum. Immo, ob vetitam 
alienationem bonorum ecclesiasticorum, vix id fieri poterit sine 
S. Sedis interventu." 14 He confirms his opinion by the enact- 
ment of the Latin-American Council (n. 322), held in 1899, 
which forbids Bishops to dissolve any Religious Community with- 
out the consent of the Holy See. This reasoning is strengthened 
by the Deer. "Dei providentis" (n. 3) which prohibits Bishops 
from changing anything upon which the Holy See has passed 



13 



Praelectiones J. C, n. 209. 

In Bouix, o. c, p. 425. 

Const. "Quamvis justo," April 30, 1749. 

L. c, p. 425. 

De Rel. Inst, et Pers., Vol. I, n. 386. 



88 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

judgment. But in spite of all this, the Const. "Conditae a Christo" 
states: "Semel approbatae sodalitates (by the Bishop) ne ex- 
tinguantur nisi gravibus de causis, et consentientibus Episcopis, 
quorum in ditione fuerint." (c. L, art. 6.) Apparently, "positis 
ponendis/' this supposes the right of abolishing an Institute when 
spread into different dioceses. Why, then, a Bishop should pos- 
sess a lesser power towards purely diocesan Societies is difficult 
to see. 

A definite limitation, however, is placed upon the powers of 
each Ordinary, when an Institute extends over several dioceses. 
No Community may establish houses in another diocese without 
the consent of the respective Bishops. 15 But when the Ordinaries 
"a quo et ad quern" have given this consent "nihil de ipsius natura 
et legibus mutari liceat, nisi singulorum Episcoporum consensu, 
quorum in dioecesibus aedes habeat." 16 For the Institutes in 
the United States, the Council of Baltimore adds : "Hae communi- 
tates filiates, ipsius conventionis vi, quoad internum regimen et 
administrationem maneant sub oboedientia superioris vel superi- 
orissae conventus primarii." 17 

Besides limiting the Bishop's power in diocesan Institutes, 
the Holy See has enjoined several positive duties towards them. 
The one respecting the reception of members has already been 
referred to. Then, he is obliged to preside over the election of 
superiors in Communities of Sisters 18 and promulgate all decrees 
regarding Religious Communities as was also stated before. 

The partial exemption, however, from Episcopal jurisdiction 
which approved Institutes enjoy by a special grant of the Holy 
See, is common to all Religious Congregations of Simple vows, 
but it refers exclusively to the internal administration and gov- 
ernment : "Certam aliquam Congregationem approbari . . . 
sub regimine Moderatoris generalis, salva Ordinariorum juris- 



15 Const. "Conditae a Christo," c. 1, n. 4. 

16 Ibidem, n. 5. 

17 III, C. Bait., n., 93. 

3S Const. "Conditae a Christo," c. 1, n. 9. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 89 

dictione ad formam S. Canonum et Apost. Constitutionum." 19 
The main relations, both temporal or spiritual, of an approved 
Institute with the outer world are strictly regulated by the Holy 
See and in many instances are subject to the local Ordinary. 

Thus, in the first place, may be mentioned the right of Ordi- 
naries to permit or prohibit the establishment of a new Religious 
house, Church, or Oratory. 20 Evidently a permission once granted 
and acted upon, begets rights in justice which no Bishop may 
violate with impunity. In case the Community wishes to con- 
tinue its residence in the diocese, the Bishop would ordinarily 
be obliged to appeal to the Holy See before he could expel a 
Congregation from his diocese. Strict justice would seem to 
dictate this. The same may be deduced from a parallel case in 
Bouix (De jure Reg., Vol. II, p. 357 ss.). 

Again by the general Canons the Church forbids the alienation 
of ecclesiastical property ("res immobles vel mobiles pretiosae") 
without the consent of the Holy See. 21 This law affects also 
Religious Congregations, 22 and binds them under censure of ex- 
communication (latae sententiae). 23 Where Bishops have special 
faculties to dispense from this law, they may likewise use them 
in favor of Religious Institutes. 24 The common opinion, how- 
ever, of Canonists maintains that no valid custom can arise in 
prejudice to this law of alienation of property. 25 The chief rea- 
son for this opinion seems to be the clause "non obstantibus con- 
suetudinibus etiam immemorabilibus." But the same clause has 
been affixed to other laws and also to the various decrees of the 
C. of Trent, yet, in spite of it, some of the Tridentine regulations 



'* Ibidem, Introduction and c. II, n. 1. 
20 "Conditae a Christo," c. II, n. 3. 



31 C. 5, tit. 13, X, lib. Ill ; et eod. 1. in 6° ; Const. "Ambitiosae," 1468. 
(c. un. tit. 4, lib. Ill in Extrar. comm.). 

"Litterae S. C. de Prop. Fide, to Archp. of Milwaukee, Jan. 15, 1903. 

23 Const. "Ap. Sedis," ser. 4, n. 3. 

24 In same letter to Archp. of Milwaukee. 

25 0jetti, o. c, n. 295 sq.; Bastien, o. c, p. 319; Wernz, o. c, vol. Ill, n. 
160 ; Dannibale, "Summ. Theol.," vol. Ill, p. SO. 



90 RKUCIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

have passed into desuetude. Hence the great Canonist Bouix 
felt constrained to say, "Non video cur consuetudo haec pro 
legitima non haberetur." 26 

Closely akin to the law of alienation of ecclesiastical property, 
and subject to the same penalties, are the late regulations for- 
bidding Religious Institutes to contract any debts or assume any 
economic obligation which exceeds $2,000.00 (10,000 libellae) 
without the special consent of the Holy See. 27 Through the 
Apostolic Delegate at Washington, D. C, the Holy See has granted 
an extension of this maximum sum to Communities in the United 
States provided they obtain this faculty from their respective 
Bishop: "I, therefore, (the Apostolic Delegate) in virtue of 
the said rescript, hereby authorize, for a period of ten years, 
the Ordinaries of the dioceses of the United States, "onerata 
tamen eorum conscientia," to permit the Religious Communities 
of their respective dioceses to contract debts up to the sum of 
50,000 francs ($10,000) without having recourse to the Holy 
See. It is, however, to be understood that all other provisions 
of the above decree remain in force." 2S We can hardly sup- 
pose that the Holy See intends to inconvenience Communities to 
such an extent that they must recur to Rome for permission in 
order to contract ordinary debts which the Institute's normal in- 
come during the year can readily meet. For the decree purposes 
to check the growing abuses "aeris alieni inconsulto et intemper- 
ate suscipiendi." 29 Then, too, debts may be more than counter- 
balanced by an Institute's credits which are at its free disposal. 
Thus Vermeersch interprets article III : "Ut non consideranda 
dicamus nisi debita quae superent pecunias et titulos semper com- 
mutabiles quae in libera sint monasterii possessione (exclusis 
proinde "capitalibus" et monialium dotibus). Hac ratione, 



26 De jure Rel., vol. 2, p. 302. 

27 Instructio S. C. de Rel., "Inter ea," July 30, 1909. 
s3 Eccl. Review, p. 93, Nov., 1915. 
29 Instructio, "Interea," cit. Periodica, vol. V, p. 15. 
29 Periodica, vol. V, p. 15. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 91 

monasterimn quod habeat 10,000 fr. sed liberas habeat pecunias 
15,000 fr. nullo debito oneratum censeatur." 30 

Another privilege and custom which is subject to great abuses 
among Religious, and, therefore, strictly regulated by ecclesiasti- 
cal law, is the collecting of alms. In this matter the Council of 
Trent subjects Religious to the authority of Bishops: "Quibus 
(Episcopis) etiam eleemosynas atque oblata sibi caritatis subsidia, 
nulla prorsus mercede accepta, fideliter colligendi facultas datur, 
ut tandem coelestes hos ecclesiae thesauros non ad quaestum, sed 
ad pietatem exerceri omnes vere intelligant." 31 The Tridentine 
law for Regulars has been extended to all Religious, and in the 
case of approved Societies the further obligation of obtaining 
the explicit permission of the Holy See has been added. 32 But 
pontifical Institutes as well as diocesan are required to have the 
permission of the local Ordinary before they may collect alms 
from the faithful even when this is their ordinary means of 
sustenance. The mere fact that an approved Institute has re- 
ceived permission from the Apostolic See, either in the approved 
Constitutions or by a special concession, does not exempt it from 
the jurisdiction of the Ordinary in this matter ; "Religiosi . . . 
Congregationum juris Pontificii, qui privilegium quaeritandi 
eleemosynas neque vi propriarum Constitutionum a S. Sede ap- 
probatarum neque vi Apostolicae concessionis guadent, veniam 
Apostolicae Sedis impetrare debent, ut quaestuationes instituere 
valeant ; praeterea licentiam per suos Superiores ab Ordinario 
loci obtinere tenentur." 33 The same decrees lay down specific 
directions for the proper regulation of all alms-collecting. 
These specifications do not include Mendicant Orders. 

If the Church has prescribed so minutely these outer relations 
of Congregations in material things, the conclusion lies very 



80 Ibidem. 

31 Sess. 21, c. 9. 

32 Deer. S. C. EE et RR, "Singulari quidem," March 27, 1896; Deer. 
S. C. de Rel., "De eleemosynis," Nov. 21, 1908. 

" Deer. De eleemosynis, c. II, n. I. 



92 RIOJGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

near that She has not oeen remiss in tracing even with a much 
greater solicitude and exactness the relations in things spiritual 
or quasi-spiritual on the part of both Bishop and Congrega- 
tions. Thus the Bishop is obliged to seek the consent of the 
Holy See and observe the formalities of Canon law in order 
to transfer the government of a diocesan seminary or give a 
parish permanently to a Religious Congregation: "Imo ne re- 
ligiosis quidem congregationum votorum simplicium, nisi ha- 
beant speciale privilegium, potest episcopus sine licentia sedis 
apostolicae seminaria regenda tradere." 34 As to parishes, the 
general law of alienation of ecclesiastical property would already 
forbid this, even if there were no other regulations. But the 
Council of Baltimore states explicitly: "Consultorum item re- 
quiretur consilium, quando id agitur, ut missio seu parochia 
tradatur alicui f amiliae religiosae ; quo in casu necessaria erit 
etiam venia S. Sedis." 35 Bishops, however, possess full power 
for sufficient reasons to divide parishes that belong to Religious 
and award the new parishes to secular priests. 36 Some authors 
would impose the duty of seeking the Chapter's consent also for 
the division of a parish, but since Bishops possess this power 
not only in virtue of their ordinary jurisdiction, but also by a 
pontifical grant, it seems that they can proceed without the con- 
sent of the Chapter or of the consultors in Mission countries. 37 
Canonists generally admit that a legitimate custom contrary to 
the law requiring the "Beneplacitum Apostolicum" for these 
transfers is quite valid. Bouix justifies such a custom for 
France. 38 But where the permission of Rome must be sought, 
the S. C. Concilii, as mentioned above, has the power to confer it, 
while the S. C. de Rel. grants the necessary faculties to the Re- 
ligious in case their Constitutions prohibit parochial work. 



24 Ojetti, o. c, n. 3419; Bargilliat, o. c, n. 267; Bouix, o. c, vol. II, p. 357. 
5 III C. of Bait., n. 20. 
58 Ojetti, o. c, nn. 3022, 3028. 
"Ojetti, o. c, n. 3026. 
K De jure Rel., Vol. II, p. 357; Vermeersch, Periodica, Vol. II, p. 4 sq. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 93 

This does not imply that the law forbidding Regulars to as- 
sume diocesan offices is extended also to Religions of Congre- 
gations. On the contrary, they are free, with the consent of 
their superiors, to take charge not only of parishes, but of any 
diocesan office provided their Constitutions do not prohibit it. 
In this latter case recourse to the Holy See would be necessary. 39 

In regard to the office of preaching within diocesan parishes 
some special observations are necessary. Not only by divine 
command, but also by the explicit Canons of the Church, is the 
office of preaching the Word of God committed to the Bishops. 
If a Religious or Secular is to announce the Divine Message, 
he can do so only with a commission from the local Ordinary. 40 
Regulars strictly so called must seek the Bishop's permission to 
preach outside of their own Church. 41 How much more then does 
this become a duty of the members of Religious Congregations! 
For announcing the Word of God in Religious houses of Com- 
munities, the papal Constitution says (Conditae a Christo, c. II, 
a. 8) ; "Horum (Episcopi) erit sacerdotes ipsos et a sacris desig- 
nare et a concionibus probare." Evidently this appertains chiefly 
and directly to Institutes of women and of lay Brothers, for in 
Institutes of clerics, the general faculties granted to their priests 
would include also the right and in fact the duty of preaching 
the Gospel to the inmates. 

But more than a mere permission to preach is demanded by 
later legislation. Pius X prescribed that "iusiurandum praestare 
debent Religiosi qui. . . . sacris concionibus habendis des- 
tinantur coram eo a quo approbationem . . . obtinent." 42 
This oath refers to Modernism. By a still later decree the Holy 
See requires that no Bishop may approve or permit a Religious 
to preach within his diocese unless he present testimonials in 



89 Bouix, 1. c. 

40 C. 15, tit. 31. X. lib., I ; C. Thent, Sess., 5, c. 2. 

n C. Trent, 1. c. 

"Const, "S. Antistitum," Sept. 1, 1910; Deer. S. C. C, Dec. 17, 1910. 



94 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

regard to his standing and ability from his superior. 43 Should 
any Bishop ever have forbidden a particular Religious to preach 
within his diocese, the superior is obliged to make mention of the 
fact in the testimonials. 44 Furthermore pastors are cautioned not 
to invite such a one into their parish. 45 

It may be questioned whether the Ordinaries' jurisdiction over 
all Religious extends also to the power of compelling them to 
partake in diocesan processions. The Council of Trent and later 
decrees from Rome assert this right for Bishops over Regulars, 46 
but in regard to other associations Ojetti says : "Compelli non 
possunt ad interveniendum processionibus associationes aliae re- 
ligiosae ; sed haec quoque, si velint, etsi non sint stricte conf ra- 
ternitates locum in ipsis habent." 47 Bastien, however, claims that 
Bishops can compel members of Religious Congregations to par- 
take in diocesan processions, even by inflicting ecclesiastical cen- 
sure. 48 Perhaps the golden mean lies nearer the truth, viz., in 
cases where Religious hold parochial or diocesan offices, they are 
at the bidding of Bishops. 49 

Truly the Ordinary's powers over Religious embraces the right 
to inflict censures: "In foro autem externo, eidem (Episcopo) 
subsunt quod spectat ad censuras," but the Apostolic Constitution 
immediately adds, "quas Antistites sacrorum fidelibus suis im- 
pertire queant." 50 This faculty hardly proves that Bishops can 
force Religious to take part in processions. In fact Rome has 
repeatedly answered that Ordinaries overstep their powers when 
they attempt to compel even secular clerics who possess no benefice 
or Religious Confraternities to participate in processions. 51 



43 Eadem decl., Dec. 17, 1910; et Responsio S. C. C, Sept. 25, 1910. 

44 Ibid. 

45 Ibid. 

46 Sess. 25, c. 13 ; Deer S. C. EE et RR., Dec. 12, 1902. 

47 O. c, n. 3298 ; Mon. Eccl., vol. IX, pp. 2, 116. 

48 O. c, n. 410 sq. 
48 Ibid. 

"Const. "Conditae a Christo," c. II, a. 5. 
51 Ojetti, 1. c. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 95 

Within the Congregation itself, however, the Bishop's authority 
is supreme and unrestricted in all things appertaining to Divine 
Worship, to conscience and to the administration of the Sacra- 
ments. Clearly and emphatically are enumerated the rights of the 
Bishop over places of Divine Worship: "Episcoporum sunt iura 
in dioecesi cuiusque sua . . . nova ab illis templa excitari, 
oratoria seu publica seu semipublica aperiri." 52 Leo XIII classed 
all those oratories as semi-public "quae . . . commodo ali- 
cuius communitatis inserviunt." 53 Some doubts have been pro- 
posed as to the Bishop's power of permitting the erection of a 
plurality of chapels in a Community. 54 The question becomes 
more involved by the two responses of the Holy See, in which 
this right was denied to certain Bishops. 55 But from the Leonine 
definitions of semi-public and private chapels one is hardly forced 
to consider chapels in Religious Communities as private over 
which the Bishop has no power. The late decree on private ora- 
tories leaves the question untouched. 56 Vermeersch remarks on 
this decree : "Dubittm istud manere utrum necne velit si enim 
responsa ista adhuc urgeantur." 57 Gasparri, Many, Bastien, and 
others maintain that the above-mentioned decisions were par- 
ticular and consequently leave the powers of the Bishops intact. 58 
Hence we can safely say that the Ordinaries can permit the erec- 
tion of several chapels in Religious Communities without recur- 
ring to the Holy See. This question becomes practical at times ; 
for more chapels are often desirable for the convenience of aged, 
sick, and infirm members of the Communities. Such chapels 
would still be "in commodum communitatis," and hence left to 
the discretion of Bishops. 



32 Const. "Conditae a Christo," C. II, n. I. 

33 Deere. S. R. C. Jan. 23, 1899. 

54 Bastien, o. c., n. 340 ; Wernz, o. c., vol. Ill, n. 457 ; Vermeersch, De 
Rel., Inst, et Pers. T. I, n. 511. 

35 Responsiones, S. R. C. March 8, 1879; Jan. 23, 1899. 

58 Deer. S. C. de Sacr., Feb. 7, 1909. 

"Periodica, vol. V, p. 111. 

38 Gasparri, De Euch. t. I, n. 214; Many, De locis sacris, n. 100. 



9G RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

The same law that leaves to the Ordinary the erection of 
chapels, also reserves the right of celebrating the Sacrifice of 
the Mass therein to him : "Episcoporum sunt iura . . . sac- 
rum fieri in domesticis sacellis." This, however, does not include 
the rubrics that must be followed in celebrating the Holy Sac- 
rifice. Until recently very many Communities possessed special 
privileges not only in the celebrating of the Mass, but also in 
the recitation of the Divine Office. At present the new law, 
common to all Congregations in this matter, reads : "Congre- 
gationes seu Instituta utriusque sexus a S. Sede approbata et sub 
regimine unius praesidis generalis constituta, si ad recitationem 
D. Officii teneantur, proprium pariter habeant Kalendarium." 59 
Hence the Bishop cannot exercise any jurisdiction over the Cal- 
endar in such approved Institutes. 

On the contrary, Institutes which are either not under a general 
direction, or are not obliged to recite the Office, have been com- 
pelled to surrender all their privileges and conform their rubrics 
to those of the respective diocese : "Congregationes et Instituta, 
quae sive Ordinaria sive Apostolica auctoritate sint approbata, 
non tamen comprehendantur paragrapho praecedenti, uti debent 
Kalendario Dioecesano, prouti iacet, additis iuxta Rubricas, Offi- 
ciis quae ipsis peculiariter concessa" (Ibidem). In both regula- 
tions there is question directly only of the Divine Office, but no 
one doubts that they apply equally to the Holy Sacrifice. Some 
hesitancy might be felt in regard to parishes entrusted to Re- 
ligious. But the same law holds good in the celebration of Mass 
in parish Churches permanently or indefinitely assigned to the 
Congregations. The Bishop of Seckau asked the S. C. R. upon 
this question and received the following reply: "Si parochia sit 
monasterio vel domui religiosae incorporata, aut eiusdem mon- 
asterii seu domus curae in perpetuum vel indefinitum tempus con- 
credita, vel communitas apud ipsam parochialem ecclesiam divina 
peragat, in Missis Kalendarium Religiosorum semper adhibeatur ; 



Deer. "Rubricae," S. R. c., Feb. 28, 1914. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 97 

secus item in Missis Kalendarium Dioecesanum semper sevetur." 
The privilege or exception that the first class of Institutes 
mentioned enjoy, does not exempt Religious from celebrating 
within their Institutes or their parishes the principle diocesan 
feasts, such as of the dedication of the Cathedral, of its patron 
or titular feast, and of the principal patron feasts of the respec- 
tive diocese. These must be celebrated by all Religious' 51 and, 
therefore, in them the diocesan calendar must be followed. As 
to titular or patron feasts of the parishes entrusted to Religious, 
Rome has said : "Communitas Religiosorum, quae cuidam pub- 
licae ecclesiae fuit addita, tenetur ad officium patroni titularis 
huius Ecclesiae et per totam octavam." c2 Evidently the same 
rubrics would obtain in regard to the celebration of the Holy 
Sacrifice of the Mass. 

On the other hand, Institutes which are now obliged to follow 
the diocesan calendar, still enjoy the privilege of celebrating the 
special feasts of the Community with the accustomed solemnities 
in the same manner as heretofore : "Uti debent Kalendario Dioe- 
cesano . . . additis iuxta Rubricas officiis quae ipsis pecu- 
liariter concessa" (supra). 

A limitation, however, on the Bishop's powers must be men- 
tioned in regard to the conservation of the Bl. Sacrament in 
these semi-public Oratories. Benedict XIV requires a papal in- 
dult for this. 63 Canonists hold that this law is still in force/ 14 
except in places where a contrary custom has obtained the force 
of law. Ordinarily the Holy See is wont to grant the permis- 
sion of conserving the Bl. Sacrament in the Chapel only upon 
the condition that the Holy Sacrifice is celebrated at least once 



60 Responsum, S. R. C, Apr. 22, 1910. 

61 "Rubricae," Feb. 28, 1914. 

62 S. R. C. Apr. 7, 1876. 

"Const. "Quamvis justo," April 30, 1749. 

M Ojetti, o. c, n. 2059 sq. ; Canoniste Cont. 1902, p. 182; Bastien, o. c, 
n. 358. 



98 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

a week. 65 If no conditions are stipulated in the indult, Doctors 
maintain that the Holy Sacrifice must be celebrated every day. 66 

Quite the contrary obtains in the right of exposing the Bl. 
Sacrament for public adoration. Here Bishops retain their 
ordinary jurisdiction : "Episcoporum sunt iura . . . Sacra- 
mentum augustum proponi palam venerationi fidelium." e7 From 
the phrase "palam venerationi fidelium," authors deduce the right 
for Religious to expose the Bl. Sacrament without Episcopal 
permission when none but members of the Community are pres- 
ent. 63 In fact this distinction between public and private or 
quasi-private religious service is quite constant throughout the 
entire Constitution of Leo XIII. Immediately upon stating the 
law of public Exposition, the Pontiff adds: "Episcoporum simi- 
liter est sollemnia et supplicationes, quae publica sint, ordinare." 
Now it is evident from what has already been said that the 
Bishop's powers hardly extend to compelling Religious to partake 
in public processions and other similar religious functions. But 
were a Community to inaugurate a public procession, they would 
certainly require the Ordinary's permission according to this regu- 
lation. Nor can the rights of Bishops to ordain public prayers 
include also the prayers of the Community, for these are gener- 
ally provided for in the Rule of the Society which the Holy See 
has acknowledged. Therefore it seems that Bastien's opinion 
given above in regard to the exposition of the Bl. Sacrament 
would follow quite naturally. 

Frequently pious souls establish certain foundations or be- 
queath certain sums of money in the form of legacies to Re- 
ligious Communities for the purpose of providing for divine 
worship or for some works of charity. The administration of 
these indeed appertains to the Congregations. But they are ac- 



65 Deer. S.. R. C. May 14, 1889. 

^Ojetti, o. c, n. 2060; Mon. Eccl. vol. XIII, p. 519. Deer. S. C. EE et 
RR, Feb. 9, 1904. Deer. S. R. C. May 14, 1889. 
67 Const. "Conditae a Christo," C. II, n. 1. 
^Bastien, o. c., n. 361. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 99 

countable to the Ordinary for them. The Bishop has the right 
to inquire into their preservation and prudent administration. 8 * 
But their alienation is reserved to the Holy See. 70 

This supervision of the Ordinary cannot be extended to other 
temporal affairs, as was stated in the beginning of this 
chapter, for the "Charter" of approved Congregations 
explicitly states : "Bonorum . . . administratio penes Mod- 
eratorem supremum maximamve Antistitam eorumque consiliaesse 
debet. . . . De iis nullam Episcopus rationem potest exi- 
gere." 71 The "Bonorum administratio" must here be strictly 
interpreted for in things spiritual the Bishop possesses well-de- 
fined powers : "Episcopis cuiusque diocesis ius est invisendi 
templa, sacraria, oratoria publica, sedes ad Sacramentum Poeni- 
tentiae, de iisque opportune statuendi iubendi." 72 We might 
ask here whether the Holy See intends to include the Com- 
munity's semi-public chapels in this episcopal visitation. Strictly 
private chapels are exempt from episcopal visitation, except the 
visitation which precedes their approval (Bargilliat, o. c, n. 
1269). But since semi-public chapels are subject to the local 
Ordinary, one w r ould think that the Bishop possesses full powers 
to visit them in the same manner as public chapels. It is certain 
that the present decree does not expressly include the Com- 
munity oratories. And Ojetti (o. c, n. 2940) quotes Gasparri 
on this point as follows: "Ceterum haec oratoria (semi-publica) 
non subsunt formali visitationi episcopi, dum dioecesim perlus- 
trant et ideo non tenentur ad procurationes, nisi in casibus iure 
expressis ; nee in eis erigi possunt beneficia" (De Euch., I, 222). 
Institutes of women and of laics, moreover, are also subject to the 
Bishop's investigation in matters of discipline and morality in gen- 
eral : "Episcopi erit inquirere num disciplina ad legum normam 



69 Const. "Conditae a Christo," aa. 9, 11. 

70 Deer S. C. de Rel., "Inter ea," July 30, 1909. 
"Const. "Conditae a Christo," c. II, n. 9. 

72 Ibid., n. 11. 



100 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

vigeat, num . . . contra clausuram peccatum, num sacra- 
menta aequa stataque frequentia syscipiantur." 73 

The "inquiry" here referred to is not intended to convey the 
idea that the Ordinary may proceed to enforce correction in case 
abuses are discovered; ordinarily he would have to refer the 
matter to the Holy See. 74 Furthermore, Institutes of clerics are 
not included in this episcopal inspection, although they are sub- 
ject to Bishops' jurisdiction in most spiritual affairs, for the 
following laws are general : "Alumni alumnaeve sodalitatum harum, 
ad forum internum quod attinet, Episcopi potestati subsunt." 
And again, "In iis quae ad spiritualia pertinent subduntur sodali- 
tates Episcopis dioecesium in quibus versantur." 75 

To the internal forum and things spiritual belong pre-eminently 
the Sacraments. Since custom, if indeed not special indults, 
has exempted Religious Congregations from the jurisdiction of 
local pastors, practically only two Sacraments require considera- 
tion, viz., Penance and Holy Orders. 

Ordinarily no occasion for the administration of Baptism or 
Matrimony in the Chapel of Religious Communities presents 
itself. But in case of exception the pastor in whose parish the 
chapel is situated, could validly assist or delegate the permission 
to assist at Matrimony in the Religious Chapel. (S. Congr. de 
Sacramentis, March 10, 1910.) As to the becomingness of ad- 
ministering the Sacrament of Matrimony in Religious Chapels, 
there can be no question. Canonists generally hold that it is un- 
lawful, at least in Institutes of women and in Seminaries. (Fer- 
reres, "los Esponsales y el Matrimonio," p. 309.) The Provincial 
Council of Valentia explicitly forbids the administration of Mat- 
rimony in churches of Regulars, of Congregations, of Colleges and 
in all Institutes of women and in Seminaries without the special 
permission of the Bishop. (See Ferreres, 1. c.) But it is use- 



73 Ibid 

74 Ibid 

75 



Ibid., c. II, n. 5 et 8. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 101 

less to develop the discipline on Matrimony. The laws regarding 
Penance are of greater importance. 

No further reference need be made to the fact that Institutes 
of clerics possess no jurisdiction "in foro interno," unless they 
receive it from the Ordinary. By way of exception Rome has 
conferred special powers on some Congregations, as for example 
the Congregations of Passionists and Redemptorists. But this 
only confirms the general law. Nor is it necessary to discuss at 
length the right of Religious to confess their sins to any duly 
authorized priest, when they are outside of their Institute. There 
was a time when this was not allowed. These prohibitions, how- 
ever, have been revoked and general liberty given to every Re- 
ligious, whether male or female, to make his or her confession 
to any priest possessing ordinary jurisdiction, when lawfully or 
unlawfully they happen to be outside of their own Community 
house. 76 But the regulations or discipline regarding the Sacra- 
ment of Penance within the Religious houses is of prime im- 
portance for Bishop and priest. 

Leo XIII prescribed, "Si sodalitates muliebres sint, designabit 
item Episcopus sacerdotes a confessionibus turn ordinarios turn 
extra ordinem, ad normam Constitutionis "Pastoralis curae" a 
Benedicto XIV decessore Nostro editae, ac decreti "Quemad- 
modum" dati a sacro Consilio Episcopis et Religiosorum ordinibus 
praeposito, die 17 decembris anno 1890 ; quod quidem decretum 
ad vivorum etiam consociationes pertinent, qui sacris minime 
initiantur." 77 From this it follows that the tribunal of Con- 
fession in Institutes of priests is administered by the superiors 
of the Community: "In presbyterorum sodalitiis, de conscientia 
. . . uni praesides cognoscent." 7S 

All the laws of Leo XIII and his predecessors which are still 
in force in regard to the confessions of Nuns and Sisters have 



76 Deer. S. C. O. Aug. 23, 1899 : Deer. S. C. de Rel., "Cum de Sacramen- 
talibus," Feb. 3, 1913; Deer. S. C. Rel., Aug. 5, 1913. 

77 Const. "Conditae a Christo," c. II, n. 8. 
73 Ibid., c. II, n. 77. 



102 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

been generalized and codified by the Holy See in the decree 
"Cum de sacramentalibus" : "visum est in unum colligere Decre- 
tum." 79 According to this decree of the Sacred Congregation, 
it devolves upon the Ordinary to provide "ordinary," "extraordi- 
nary," and some "special" confessors for every Religious house 
of Nuns and Sisters within his diocese. We say "house," be- 
cause no obligation rests upon the Bishop to assign special con- 
fessors to Sisters who confess in the parish Church, though per- 
haps it would be advisable, as a rule, to do so. If Bishops made 
this provision, then these confessors could hear the Sisters' con- 
fessions also in their parochial convent in case of illness or some 
other extraordinary circumstances. 80 

The ordinary confessor is appointed by the Bishop for the 
term of three years. Of course, it is understood that a plurality 
of regular confessors may be assigned. In fact it would be 
necessary in large Communities. In such event the extent of 
each individual confessor's faculties would naturally rest with 
the Bishop who would certainly express the limitations, if any, 
in the commission. The ordinary confessor, however, may not 
be reappointed unless the scarcity of priests demand it or the 
majority of Sisters for good reasons desire it. Certainly this 
limitation would not include ordinary confessors designated for 
the Confessions of Sisters in the parish Church. 81 These de- 
pend solely on the will of the Bishop. But the law provides that 
the ordinary confessor may not be made extraordinary within a 
year from the expiration of his term. 

In virtue of the office of ordinary confessor no right is con- 
ferred to meddle with the internal affairs of the Community. 
This would not only be imprudent, but also in direct violation of 
the law of the Holy See. The two forums are strictly separated 
and no reason will justify their blending. If a priest is the 
moderator of a Community or house, he is thereby excluded from 



Deer. S. C. de Rel., "Cum de Sacramentalibus," Feb. 3, 1913. 
Vermeersch, Periodica, vol. VII, p. 93 sq. 
Responsio S. C. EE. et RR., July 20, 1875. 



IN THEIR KXTERNAL RELATIONS 103 

hearing the confessions of the Sisters who reside in that house, 
except in very extraordinary cases. 

Nor is this the only disqualification expressed by the decree. 
Ordinarily only priests who have passed their fortieth year and 
who in their ministry have manifested prudence and integrity of 
character, are eligible to the office of Father-confessor for Sis- 
ters. While prudence and good morals are essential at all times 
to worthily discharge the duties of the confessional, yet the 
Holy See considers that they are requisite in a special degree 
for the confessions of Religious. Naturally the Bishop may for 
just reasons make exception to the age-requirement law. Prud- 
ence and virtue are not necessarily the endowments of a certain 
age, and therefore the Holy See leaves much to the discretion of 
the Bishop. 

No general law determines the frequency with which the ordi- 
nary confessor must afford the Sisters an occasion to receive the 
Sacrament of Penance. The Council of Trent admonishes 
Bishops and superiors to see to it that Nuns approach the Sacra- 
ments of Confession and Communion at least once a month 
(Sess. XXV, c. X, de Rel.). But this regulation establishes only 
the extreme limit and leaves the rest to the proper au- 
thorities. Moreover, no one doubts that Religious should 
be given every opportunity of gaining the many indulgences 
granted by the Church. By a decree of the S. C. Indulgentiae 
(Dec. 9, 1763) confession at least once a week is necessary for 
obtaining the customary plenary indulgences during the week. 
In some countries an extension to two weeks has been granted. 
But Pius X declared that these prescriptions are not obliga- 
tory for daily communicants. 82 Hence it can hardly be alleged 
that the reason of gaining Indulgences would urge weekly con- 
fessions and therefore oblige the ordinary confessor to visit the 
convents weekly. Custom, however, has established a rather 
general and correct norm in favor of weekly confessions for 
Religious. If, therefore, the Bishop would not specify the days 



Deer. S. C. Indulg., Feb. 14, 1906. 



104 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

for confession, the custom of the convent could not be disregarded 
without good reason. 

The prescriptions for the extraordinary confessor are very 
similar to those for the ordinary. The Holy See demands that 
the Bishop assign extraordinary confessors for every Com- 
munity "pluries in anno." This would certainly mean at least 
twice a year. The Council of Baltimore says: "Extraordinarius 
saltern bis vel ter in anno ad confessiones omnium excipiendas 
se praesentabit." 83 The Plenary Council of Quebec prescribes the 
same : "Bis vel ter in anno confessarius extraordinarius concedi 
debet monialibus etiam votorum simplicium." 84 No specified time 
for the duration of the term of office is given by the Holy See 
or particular Councils so far as could be determined from works 
consulted. The Bishop is at full liberty in all regulations con- 
cerning the extraordinary, except that the qualities required for 
the ordinary, should also be insisted on for the extraordinary con- 
fessor. Again, the Bishop may not appoint an ordinary con- 
fessor within a year to the same Institute, nor may he delegate 
a Religious without the consent of his superior. 

Finally a certain number of special confessors must be desig- 
nated whom the Sisters may call to hear their confessions, when 
for any reason they prefer not to confess to the ordinary con- 
fessor. Since this privilege may easily be abused, it rests with 
the individual confessor to exercise the greatest prudence in 
treating such souls in order that what is granted for the greater 
liberty of conscience, may not revert to the detriment of Religious 
or of their Community. 

For very special reasons approved by the Ordinary, a Nun 
or Sister could obtain a particular father confessor; but since 
this must necessarily be of very rare occurrence it suffices to 
know that the Holy See provides even for such extreme cases, 
but leaves it to the Bishop to judge of the individual case. 



88 III, C. Bait., n. 97; C. of Trent, Sess. XXV, c. 10, de Reg. 
** I PI. C. of Quebec, n. 270 ; Cf r. also Vermeersch, Periodica, vol. VII 
p. 89. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 105 

These regulations are intended as the ordinary norms for Com- 
munities of women. But in cases of serious sickness, even though 
there exists no danger of death, a Sister may summon any priest 
having faculties within the diocese as often as she sees fit. The 
Church's mission on earth is the salvation of souls. Therefore 
she puts no limits on her children in questions of conscience, 
and especially not when afflictions, the natural harbingers of the 
Life to come, bear them down. 

The new decree nowhere explicitly states that the validity of 
the confessions within the convent depends upon this episcopal 
approval. Seemingly, however, the regulations suppose it. 85 
Barrett says on this point : ''Specialis deputatio ab ipso Ordinario 
exigitur, et quidem ad validitatem, pro confessario domus ordi- 
nario, pro confessario domus extraordinario, pro istis sacerdoti- 
bus unicuique domui religiosae assignatis quos singulae vocent, 
pro uno isto speciali confessario ob peculiarem causam in con- 
fessarium habitualem petito." 8G 

Some authors, indeed, thought that the decree "In audientia" 
(Aug. 3, 1913) which gives to any approved confessor the faculty 
of validly hearing the confessions of Religious even within the 
Religious house, included also Religious Institutes of women. 
But the general opinion of Canonists denies this. 87 

In speaking of the new laws regarding confession in convents, 
Vermeersch draws attention to the fact that special approbation 
or jurisdiction is necessary only when the Nun or Sister wishes 
to confess within her own Convent. If, then, a Religious were 
visiting another Convent, an approved confessor could validly 
and licitly absolve her in the Convent Chapel. 88 Such a case 
might become practical, especially where the chaplain would be 
called on to hear the confessions of visiting Sisters. Having, 
therefore, the ordinary approval from the Bishop, he could exer- 



85 Vermeersch, o. c. p. 92. 

88 Sabetti-Barrett, "Comp. Theol. Mor.," Edit. 23, p. 712. 

87 Ibid., p. 704. 

83 O. c, vol. VII, p. 92. 



106 RKUGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

cise his faculty in regard to visitors, but not in regard to the 
resident Sisters of the Convent. 

The regulations or the Sacrament of Penance are not altogether 
dissimilar to those of the Sacrament of Holy Orders. The Holy 
See prescribes certain conditions which the Bishop must carry 
out before he may licitly ordain a Religious. These conditions 
are the ordinary ones of Canon law. Religious Congregations 
possess no general privileges of Ordination like the strict Orders. 
Hence the Ordinary may not ordain a Religious unless the latter 
present the required testimonials, dimissorials, and canonical title 
of Ordination, or proof that the Congregation has received a 
special privilege which exempts it from this requirement. 89 If, 
however, an Institute possess a special privilege of Ordination, 
then, "Les superieurs des Instituts qui ont obtenu un indult 
special de faire ordonner leurs subjets pour leur propre compte, 
peuvent donner les lettres dimissoriales a l'Eveque du diocese ou 
se trouve le monastere." 90 

By the decree "Auctis admodum" (Nov. 4, 1892), the Holy 
See forbids the conferring of Sacred Orders on Religious before 
they have made their perpetual profession. Vermeersch thinks 
that this is obligatory only when the candidate is promoted to 
Holy Orders "sub titulo privilegiato." Therefore, he concludes, 
a Religious could be ordained prior to the perpetual profession 
under a regular title, as for instance under the title of patrimony. 91 

In addition to the ordinary testimonials which are demanded 
for Holy Orders, the Holy See has seen fit to exact testimonials 
also from the pastors in whose territory a Religious has been 
located for three months or more of military service. 92 This was 
referred to more fully in the fourth chapter. 

Ordination, moreover, may not be conferred on Religious, 
"nisi, praeter alia a jure statuta, . . . professi . . .testi- 



89 Const. "Conditae a Christo," c. II, a. 6. 

90 Bastien, o. c, p. 237. 
"Vermeersch, Periodica, Vol. V, p. (15). 

92 Deer. S. C. de Rel., "Inter Reliquas," Jan. 1, 1911; Responsios P. de 
Rel., Feb. 1, 1912. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 107 

moniales litteras exhibeant, quod saltern per annum sacrae theol- 
ogiae operam dederint si agatur de subdiaconatu, ad minus per 
biennium, si de diaconatu, et quoad presbyteratum, saltern per 
triennium, praemisso tamen regulari aliorum studiorum curri- 
culo." 93 The Sacred Congregation for Religious has declared 
that the terms of this paragraph of the said decree must be inter- 
preted literally, or rather it has interpreted them literally. The 
Holy See, moreover, has added another year of Theology to 
the regular course. 94 No express mention is made that this addi- 
tional year must also precede Ordination. Hence it is inter- 
preted that the law regarding the conferring of Holy Orders 
is not changed, provided a complete course of Theology is ob- 
tained in the prescribed three years. This additional year 
of regular studies could then be fulfilled subsequently. 95 

A more thorough study of Theology is especially necessary in 
our times when the air is filled with hyper-critical, irreligious, 
and heretical tendencies. Pius X strove to counteract these by 
timely regulations demanding a more complete course of studies 
for ecclesiastical students. 96 Furthermore, as an aid to their 
intellectual development and as a protection for the true doc- 
trine of Christ, the Sovereign Pontiff imposed the obligation of 
taking an oath against Modernism before receiving Major Orders. 
This does not necessarily mean before each Major Order, but 
at least before the Subdiaconate. 97 In the case of Religious 
taking this oath, the law was not clear in designating before whom 
they must make the oath. This doubt has been solved by the 
decision: ''Alumni Religiosi majoribus ordinibus initiandi tenentur 
dare iusiurandum a Moto proprio S. Antistitum praescriptum 
coram Episcopo Ordines conferente." 98 



93 Deer. S. C. EE. et RR., "Auctis admodum," Nov. 4, 1892. 

94 Declaratio S. C. de Rel., Sept. 7, 1909. 
85 Vermeersch, Periodica, vol. V, p. 47. 
"Deer. "Sacrorum Antistitum," Sept. 1, 1910. 
" Responsio S. C. C. March 24, 1911. 
M Responsio S. C. C. Dec. 17, 1911. 



108 REUGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 

When all the prerequisites for the reception of the Sacrament 
of Holy Orders have been complied with, the superior of the 
Congregation must formally present the candidate to the Bishop 
for ordination." The fact that one is a Religious does not exempt 
him in ordination from the obligation of promising obedience to 
the Bishop, nor of making the Solemn vow of chastity, even 
though the Religious may have already bound himself by the 
perpetual vow of chastity. 100 This is due chiefly to the canoni- 
cal status of Religious Congregations. They are subject to the 
ordinary jurisdiction of the Bishop in all things spiritual. 

In conclusion it is necessary to draw attention to certain dele- 
gated powers which Ordinaries receive from the Holy See. It 
is impossible for the Holy See to exercise direct jurisdiction over 
the entire government of Religious Societies. The very nature 
of some, especially of Institutes of women, requires a closer 
supervision. The Council of Trent commanded Ordinaries to 
supervise the reception of their candidates and the observance of 
the Cloister. Papal laws, as has been noticed, ever and anon 
repeat the Tridentine admonitions and add many other provi- 
sions. The Ordinary is responsible for the due and effective pro- 
mulgation of these decrees. But as a special delegate of the 
Holy See, he is obliged to safeguard freedom of conscience and 
the unrestricted access to the Sacrament of Penance according to 
the decree "Cum de sacramentalibus." The fact that an Insti- 
tute of women is under the jurisdiction of an exempted Order, 
makes no infringement on this right of Bishops. Where his 
ordinary jurisdiction fails to supply the necessary power, a dele- 
gated right comes to his assistance. An equally important duty 
rests upon Ordinaries to preside as a Papal Delegate over Con- 
vents or Chapters when the various offices are assigned in Com- 
munities of Sisters. 101 To these, particular delegations are fre- 
quently added according to the peculiar nature of some Institutes 



M Const. "Conditae a Christo," C. II, a. 6. 

100 Bastien, o. c, pp. 24, 239. 

101 Const. "Conditae a Christo," C. I, n. 1. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 109 

and the varying circumstances of different countries. These 
special faculties can be learned only from the respective indults. 
This, then, finishes the purpose of the present treatise. An 
effort has been made to outline the Religious Congregations' ex- 
ternal relations, both canonically and historically. This led to 
the investigation of their nature, origin and development ; of 
their foundation and ecclesiastical approval ; of the reception, 
bond, and expulsion of members ; and finally of their pontifical 
and episcopal government. Considering the limitations and 
frailties of human nature, the writer can hardly hope that his 
sincere and laborious efforts have detected every truth or escaped 
every mistake. Hence the kind indulgence of the reader is 
solicited, if errors or shortcomings have crept into this short 
treatise. 

A.M.D.G. ET B.V.M. 



110 



RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 




IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 111 



SOURCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY. 
Sources. 

The Corpus Juris Canonici edit. Richter, Lepsiae 1839. 

Canones et Decreta C. Tridentini, Ratisbonae, editio stereotypy 1910. 

Bullarium Romanum. 

Bullarium Benedicti XIV. 

Analecta juris Pontificii. 

Analecta ecclesiastica. 

Acta Sanctae Sedis. 

Acta Apostolicae Sedis. 

Collectanea in usum S. C. EE et RR. 

Decreta C. PI. Baltimorensis Tertii, Baltimorae, Murphy. 

Acta et Decreta C. PI. Americae Latinae, 1899, Romae 1900. 

Acta et Decreta C. PI. Quebecensis Primi, 1909, Quebec 1912. 



Bibliography. 

Angeeus a SS. Corde, Manuale Juris Communis Rel. 

Arndt, S. J., Die Kirchlichen Rechtsbestimmungen fuer Frauen Congre- 

gationen. 
Arndt, Aug., Die Rechtsverhaeltnisse der Oratorien (in Arkiv, F.K.K. 

vol. 72). 
Arndt, Die Ordensschwestern und die taegliche Kommunion. 
Arndt, Das Dekret "Quemadmodum (17 dec, 1890) fuer Ordensfrauen 

u. Laiengenossenschaften. 
Adigard, Decret apostolique du 17 dec. 1890 sur le compte de conscience, 

la confession et la communion dans les communautes relig. 
Arkiv. f.K.K. Tom XVII, p. 24; XXIII, p. 386, LXVI, p. 159. 
AnaeEcta, J. P., Vol. V, Traite des Congregations seculieres; 
Vol. XXVII, XXVIII, Institutes seculieres; 
Vol. XXVII, Institutes Modernes; 
Vol. XI, Les Communantes. 
Also Vols. XXIV, XXVI. 
Biedereack, S. J. De jure Reg. 
Bouix, De Jure Regularium, 2 Vol. 
Bargieeiat, Praelectiones J. C, Vol. II (Edit, tricesima). 



1.12 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 



Butler, Lives of Saints. 

BaleErini, Gury. Comp. Theol. Vol. II, de voto. 

Bastien, Directoire Canonique. 

BrEntano, Die barmherr. Schwestern i. Bezug auf Armen und Kranken- 

pflaege. 
Beeeizarius, Manuale Regularium. 
Bizzari, Analecta Vol. IV, V, VI, VII, IX. 

Bouche, Du droit d'exister de congregations rel. non reconnues. 
Bieeuart, Summa, S. Thos. De Religiosis et de voto. 
Bouquieeon, Theol. Mor. Fundamentalis. 
Battandier, Guide Canonique, 2nd edit. 
Boudinhon, Les Congregations Religieuses, Articles in Le Canoniste 

Contemporain, Vol. 25, 26, 27. 
BugdaeE, Monasticon Anglicanum. 
Cappeeeo, De Curia Romana. 
CareiER, L'Incapacite de recevoir des congregation religieuses et de leurs 

membres. 
Craisson, Des Communautes a voeux simples. 
Daris, Quaestiones canonico — civiles de statu religioso. 
DeBuck, De exemptione. 

Dechamps, Instructions aux communautes relig. des femmes. 
Dehey, Religious Orders of Women in the United States. 
De Luca, Relatio Curiae Romanae. 
DeBuck, De l'etat religieux en Belgique au XIX siecle. 
D'Annibale, Summula Theol. Mor. 5th edit. 

ECCEESIASTICAE REVIEW, Vol. 51, 1914. 

Gasparri, Tract. Can. de S. Ordinatione. 

Gasparri, Tract. Can. de SS. Euch. 

Gasquet, English Monastic Life. 

Gennari, Consultazioni Mor. Can. lit. 

Franco-Huber, Das Paepstl. Decret "Quemadmodum." 

Herve-Bazin, Les grand Ordres et Congregations rel. de femmes, Paris 

1889. 
Heuser, Congregation, Art. In Kirch-Lex. 
Heimbucher, Orden und Kongr. Vols. I and 11. 
Hieeing, Procedure at the Roman Courts. 
Hohm, "Vocations," 2 vols. 

Hoen, Die barmherz, Schwestern von heilig. Karl Borromaeus. 
Joder, Das Beichtvateramt in Frauenkloestern. 
Joder, Das Sammeln von Almosen durch Ordensfrauen. 
Keiter, Bedingungen f. d. Eintritt in saemtl. relig. Maennerorden und 

Genossenschaften Deutsch. Oesterr. u. d. Schweiz. 
Koher, De monialium et recent. Congregationum mulierum confessario. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 113 



Lanseots, Hand Book for Religious Congregations of Women. 

Lenormant, De Associations rel. dans le Catholicisme. 

Lejevne, La Confession et la Communion des religieux. 

Lessius, Disputatio de statu vitae deligendo et religioso ingressu. 

Lucidi, De Visitatione, C. V. de M. (3rd edit.). 

Many, Prael. Can. de Missa. 

Many, Prael. Can. de locis sacris. 

Many, Prael. Can de S. Ordinatione. 

Meeot, De Ordinibus et Congr. Relig. 

Meynard, O. P. Responses Canonique et pratiques sur le gouvernement 

et devoirs des religieuses a voeux simples 2 vol. 
MicheeETTi, Jus Pianum. 

NardELU, Le Congregazioni religiose di voti semplici nei rapporti con i 

vescovi secondo la bolla "Conditae" di Leone XIII. 
Nervegna, De jure Practice Reg. 
Nervegna, De Institutis votorum simplicium. 
Nilles, De libertate clericorum religionem ingrediendi. 
Noldin, Summa Theol. Moralis, 3 vols. 
Ojetti, Synopsis Rerum Mor. et Juris Pontificii. 
OjETTi, De Romana Curia. 

Passerini, de Sextula, De hominum statibus et officiis. 
Pellizarius, Manuale Reg. 
Peyrinis, De privileges Regularium. 
Piat, Praelectiones juris regularis. 
Preuschen, Moenchtum und Sarariskult. 
Rodericus, Quaestiones regulares et canonicae. 
Rotarius, Theol. Mor. Regularium. 

Sabetti-Barrett, Compendium, Theol. Mor. (23rd edit.). 
Santi-Leitner, Praelectiones, L. 3, t 36. 
Sauvestre, Le Congregations rel. 

Schels, De neuren religioesen Frauengenossenschaften. 
Schmalzgrueber, Jus Canonicum universum, edit. Rom. 1843. Lib. III. 

Schuppe, Die neuer. rel. Frauengenossenschaften und ihr. Beziehungen z. 
Ortspfarren. 

Schuppe, Die Selbstvervaltung d. neuer. relig. Frauengenossenschaften 

und ihr Verhaelniss Z. Dioezesan Bishof. 

Schuppe, Studien ueb. d. relig. neuer. Frauengenossenschaften. 

Sebastianelli, Praelectiones J. C. 2d edit. Vol. I. Pars. II. De Regularibus. 

Schuppe, Das Wesen und Rechtsverhaeltnisse der neueren Frauengenos- 
senschaften. 

ShErER, Handbuch d. Kirchenrechtes Vol. II, p. 698-880. Graz and Liepzig, 

1898. 

SprEitzenhofer, Die Entwicklung des Alten Moenchtum. 



114 REUGIOUS CONGREGATIONS 



St. Thomas, II, II, q. 88. 

Suarez, De virtute et statu religionis (Pars. 2a). 

Suarez, Tom. 14. Tract 7, de Rel. et de Voto. 

Touchet, La secularisation des congreganistes devant le droit canon. 

Tyck, Notices historique sur les congregations et communantes rel. 

Van Espen, Jus. eccl. P. I, Tit. 33. 

Verhoeven, De regularium et saecularium clericorum juribus et omciis. 

VermeErsch, de Rel. et Inst. 2 vols. 

VermeErsch, Religious; Catholic Ency. 

VermeErsch, Periodica, 7 vols. 

Viteau, Les lois de l'Eglise sur la confession et la communion des re- 

ligieuses. 
Wernz, Jus Decretalium, Tom. III. 



IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 



Universitas Catholica Americae 



Washingtonii, D. C. 



S. Facultas Theologica 



1915-1916 



TITULI 



HORA IX A. M. DIE V JUNII A. D. MCMXVI 



I. De Potestate Legislativa Ecclesiae Catholicae. 
II. De Legislatoribus Ecclesiasticis. 

III. DeObjecto Legum Ecclesiasticarum. 

IV. De Interpretatione Legum Ecclesiasticarum. 
V. De Corpore Juris. 

VI. De Regulis Juris in Genere. 

VII. De Decretis Romanorum Pontincum. 

VIII. De Decretis SS. Congregationum. 

IX. De Electione Romani Pontificis. 

X. De Civili Veto seu Exclusiva. 

XL De Romanae Curiae Dicasteriis in Genere. 

XII. De Congregatione Negotiis Religiosarum Sodalium 
Praeposita. 

XIII. De Congregatione de Propaganda Fide. 

XIV. De Vicariis Apostolicis. 

XV. De Cardinali Protectore super Ordines et Congrega- 
tiones. 

XVI. De Juribus Episcoporum Ordinandi Religiosos. 

XVII. De Episcoporum Jurisdictione in Religiosis Institutis. 

XVIII. De Coadjutoribus Episcoporum. 

XIX. De Parocho quoad Sacramentum Baptismi. 

XX. De Parocho quoad Sacramentum Matrimonii. 

XXI. De Parocho quoad Religiosas Congregationes. 

XXII. De Potestate Parochi quoad Audiendas Religiosorum 
et Religiosarum Confessiones. 

XXIII. De Privilegio Clericorum Ingrediendi Religionem. 

XXIV. De Transitu Religiosorum et Religiosarum ad Aliud 

Institutum. 

XXV. De Exemptione Religiosorum Ordinum et Institu- 
torum. 



XXVI. De Usu Kalendarii in Religiosis Institutis. 
XXVII. De Saecularizatione Religiosorum Clericorum. 
XXVIII. De Tertiis Ordinibus Laicis. 
XXIX. De Confraternitatibus. 
XXX. DeOratoriis. 

XXXI. De Alienatione Bonorum Ecclesiasticorum. 
XXXII. De Lege Contrahendi Debita in Religiosis Institutis. 

XXXIII. De Sepultura Ecclesiastica. 

XXXIV. De lis Quae Praemitti Debent Celebrationi Matri- 

monii. 

XXXV. De Impedimento Disparitatis Cultus. 

XXXVI. De Impedimento Vis et Metus. 

XXXVII. De Impedimento Clandestinitatis juxta "Ne Temere." 

XXXVIII. De Impedimento Aetatis. 

XXXIX. De Impedimento Publicae Honestatis. 

XL. De Impedimento Cognationis Spiritualis. 

XLI. De Transactione. 

XLII. De Foro Competenti. 

XLIIL DeArbitris. 

XLIV. DeAdvocatis. 

XLV. DeTestibus. 

XLVI. De Judiciis in Causis Expulsionis et Dimissionis Re- 
ligiosorum. 

XLVII. DeDolo. 

XL VIII. De Contumnacia. 

XLIX. De Delicto Ecclesiastico Eiusque Constitutivis in 
Genere. 

L. De Concursu Plurium Personarum in Idem Delictum. 

LI. De Applicatione Legis Poenalis Ad Delicta Eccle- 
siastica. 



LII. De Poenis Vindicativis in Genere. 

LIU. De Irregularitate in Genere. 

LIV. De Poenis Inhabilitantibus Ad Officia Ecclesiastica. 

LV. De Privatione Officiorum et Beneficiorum Ecclesiasti- 
corum. 

LVI. De Depositione Clericorum. 

LVIL De Degradatione Clericorum. 

L/VTII. De Conditionibus, Modo, Formis Requisitis Ad In- 
fligendas Censuras Ecclesiasticas. 

LIX. De Effectibus Censurarum Ecclesiasticarum. 

LX. De Cessatione et Absolutione Censurarum Ecclesias- 
ticarum. 



Vidit Sacra Facultas : 

Daniei, I. Kenedy, O. P., S. T. M., p. t. Decanus. 
Franciscus I. Coeln, Ph. D., p. t. a Secretis. 
Vidit Rector Universitatis, 
* Thomas I. Shahan, S. T. D. 



VITA. 




Celestine A. Freriks was born of Dutch parents at Essen, Ger- 
many, March 9th, 1876. When he was four years of age his 
parents emigrated to the United States and established their per- 
manent domicile at Corning, Ohio. Here he received his early 
education in the State school, but completed the primary grades 
in the Parocial school of St. Bernard's parish under the guidance 
of the Sisters of Charity of Nazareth, Kentucky. Upon the 
successful completion of the six-year academic and collegiate 
course with the Fathers of the Most Precious Blood of College- 
ville, Indiana, St. Joseph's College conferred on him the degree 
of Bachelor of Arts in 1906. In the same year he entered St. 
Charles Seminary of the Society of the Most Precious Blood. 
December 21st, 1911, the Society presented him to His Grace, 
the Most Reverend Henry Moeller, Archbishop of Cincinnati, 
for ordination to the Priesthood. The following year he entered 
the Catholic University of America for a post-graduate course, 
choosing for his major study Canon Law under the direction of 
Dr. Creagh, and subsequently of Dr. Bernardini ; and for his 
minors, Moral and Sacramental Theology under Dr. Melody and 
Dr. Kennedy, O. P. He attended, moreover, the course in In- 
dustrial Ethics of Dr. Ryan. Gladly, therefore, does he avail 
himself of this occasion of publicly thanking the various teachers 
for their valuable assistance and never-failing kindness. 

□ □□ 

DDDD 
DDD 



ty 



<p, 



* 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: Feb. 2006 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATICU 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724) 779-21 1 1 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




013 989,752 3 



■ 



I 



